Opinion
2005-04771.
May 2, 2006.
In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, the defendants separately appeal, as limited by their respective briefs, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Silverman, J.), dated May 3, 2005, as, in effect, granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to restore the action to active status.
McManus, Collura Richter, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Stephen L. Geller of counsel), for appellants Levidow, Levidow Oberman, David Levidow, Richard Levidow, and Richard Oberman.
Franklin C. Hyman, P.C., Garden City, N.Y., for appellants Easton Clark, Mark Easton, and Alan Clark.
L'Abbate, Balkan, Colavita Contini, LLP, Garden City, N.Y. (Jonathan J. Arzt of counsel), for appellants Lazarowitz Manganillo, Harvey Lazarowitz, and Carlo Manganillo.
Gershbaum Weisz, P.C. (Joshua Annenberg, New York, N.Y.), for respondent.
Before: Florio, J.P., Miller, Adams and Skelos, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable by the appellants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
The Supreme Court properly, in effect, granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to restore the action to active status ( see O'Connell v. City Wide Auto Leasing, 6 AD3d 682; Akpinar v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 302 AD2d 337).
The parties' remaining contentions are either without merit or need not be reached in light of this determination.