Opinion
Motion No. 2022-01431 Index No. 2840/2019
04-14-2023
Kathleen F. Heinegg, respondent, v. Thomas F. Heinegg, appellant.
Unpublished Opinion
MOTION DECISION
M288433
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, J.P. JOSEPH J. MALTESE PAUL WOOTEN HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
Appeal from a decision and order after trial of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated January 10, 2022. Motion by the appellant to extend the time to perfect the appeal. By order to show cause dated December 14, 2022, the parties to the appeal were directed to show cause before this Court why the appeal in the above-entitled action should or should not be dismissed on the ground that no appeal lies a from decision (see Schicchi v J.A. Green Constr. Co., 100 A.D.2d 509), and no appeal lies as of right from an order that is not the result of a motion made on notice (see CPLR 5701), and leave to appeal has not been granted, and the appellant's motion was held in abeyance in the interim.
Now, upon the order to show cause and no papers having been filed in response thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal is granted, and the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see Schicchi v J.A. Green Constr. Co., 100 A.D.2d 509); and it is further, ORDERED that the motion to extend the time to perfect the appeal is denied as academic.
CONNOLLY, J.P., MALTESE, WOOTEN and VOUTSINAS, JJ., concur.