Nesmith v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Full title: JANNIE NESMITH, IN HER REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY ONLY AS PARENT AND NATURAL…

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 27, 2012

2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 65750 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

Motion No: CA 12-00180 DOCKET NO. CA 12-00181 DOCKET NO. CA 12-00182

02-27-2012

JANNIE NESMITH, IN HER REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY ONLY AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF JANNIE PATTERSON, AN INFANT AND LORENZO PATTERSON, JR., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 1.) JANNIE NESMITH, IN HER REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY ONLY AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF JANNIE PATTERSON, AN INFANT AND LORENZO PATTERSON, JR., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 2.) JANNIE NESMITH, IN HER REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY ONLY AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF JANNIE PATTERSON, AN INFANT AND LORENZO PATTERSON, JR., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 3.)

SCUDDER

PRESENT: , P. J., SMITH, CENTRA, FAHEY, AND CARNI, JJ.

Appellant having moved to consolidate the appeals taken herein from a decision and orders of the Supreme Court dated or entered in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Monroe on June 9, 2011 (appeal No. 1), August 31, 2011 (appeal No. 2), and October 27, 2011 (appeal No. 3), or, in the alternative having moved to withdraw appeal Nos. 1 and 2 without prejudice, and having moved to extend the time to perfect appeal No. 3, and

Respondents having cross-moved to dismiss the appeals,

Now, upon reading and filing the affirmation of Roy J. Karlin dated January 17, 2012, the affirmation of James E. Nixon, Esq., dated January 31, 2012, and the notices of motion and cross motion with proof of service thereof, and due deliberation having been had thereon,

It is hereby ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks to withdraw appeal Nos. 1 and 2 is granted, and the appeals are marked as withdrawn, and

It is further ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks to consolidate the appeals is dismissed as moot, and

It is further ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks an extension of time to perfect appeal No. 3 is dismissed as premature (see 22 NYCRR 1000.13 [f]), and

It is further ORDERED that the cross motion insofar as it seeks to dismiss appeal Nos. 1 and 2 is dismissed as moot, and

It is further ORDERED that the cross motion insofar as it seeks to dismiss appeal No. 3, for failure to perfect timely the appeal, is granted and the appeal is dismissed without further order unless the appeal is perfected on or before April 27, 2012.

Frances E. Cafarell, Clerk