Rodriguez v. Johnson

2 Citing cases

  1. State v. Richard Tt.

    127 A.D.3d 1528 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)   Cited 9 times

    Indeed, even the stay pending appeal of the vacatur order does not “suspend the operation of the order ... and restore the case to the status which existed before it was issued” (Matter of Pokoik v. Department of Health Servs. of County of Suffolk, 220 A.D.2d 13, 15, 641 N.Y.S.2d 881 [1996] ; see Baker v. Board of Educ. of W. Irondequoit School Dist., 152 A.D.2d 1014, 1014, 544 N.Y.S.2d 258 [1989] ). While we appreciate respondent's desire to bring the proceedings in this case to a definitive conclusion, the present appeal has been taken from a vacated order and must be dismissed (see Matter of Feustel v. Rosenblum, 6 N.Y.3d 885, 886, 817 N.Y.S.2d 211, 850 N.E.2d 25 [2006] ; Matter of Rodriguez v. Johnson, 45 A.D.3d 279, 279, 843 N.Y.S.2d 832 [2007], lv. denied 10 N.Y.3d 705, 857 N.Y.S.2d 38, 886 N.E.2d 803 [2008] ). ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

  2. Reyes v. Sequeira

    64 A.D.3d 500 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)   Cited 15 times

    Regardless of whether Supreme Court correctly vacated the stipulations that are the subject of this appeal, the stipulations have been vacated and this appeal is moot because the rights of the parties cannot be affected by a determination of this appeal ( Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714; see Matter of Feustel v Rosenblum, 6 NY3d 885, 886 ["Appeal taken as of right from the Appellate Division judgment . . . and motion for leave to appeal from said judgment . . . dismissed as moot upon the ground that the judgment of the Appellate Division has been vacated by a subsequent order of that Court"]; Matter of Rodriguez v Johnson, 45 AD3d 279, lv denied 10 NY3d 705 ["Petitioner's appeal is moot because Supreme Court vacated the judgment on appeal"]; Fidata Trust Co. Mass. v Leahy Bus. Archives, 187 AD2d 270, 271 ["The order on appeal was subsequently vacated and thus rendered moot"]; see also Perez v Morse Diesel Intl., Inc., 10 AD3d 497; Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C5517:l, at 208 ["If the disposition of (a) motion (to reargue, renew or vacate an order) does substantially affect the original order . . . it may have some impact on the appeal.