Opinion
Submitted May 2, 2000.
June 19, 2000.
In a proceeding pursuant to General City Law § 20 Gen. City(22), inter alia, to direct Augustine Barry to permit the petitioners to enter his house to perform structural repairs so that work on a nearby construction project could resume, Augustine Barry appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Giaccio, J.), dated March 10, 1999, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 2104 to compel the petitioners to make further repairs to his house in accordance with a stipulation of settlement between the parties.
Murtha Madsen, P.C., Westbury, N.Y. (Joseph E. Madsen of counsel), for appellant.
Michael D. Hess, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Larry A. Sonnenshein and Grace Goodman of counsel), for respondents.
Before: LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., DAVID S. RITTER, MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The stipulation of settlement between the parties only obligated the petitioners to restore Augustine Barry's house to the condition it was in prior to the commencement of the petitioners' nearby construction project. As a result, the Supreme Court properly denied his motion to compel the petitioners to make further repairs pursuant to the stipulation until after resolution of all of the causation issues in a related tort action commenced by Barry against the petitioners (see, Villatoro v. Talt, 269 A.D.2d 390; [2d Dept., Feb. 7, 2000]; 288/98 W. End Tenants Corp. v. Mosesson, 144 A.D.2d 305; Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Industrial Scrap Processing Corp., 97 A.D.2d 532; see also, Ehrenpreis v. Klein, 260 A.D.2d 532; Terranova v. Secured Capital Corp. of N.Y., 250 A.D.2d 835).