Opinion
March 1, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Jiudice, J.).
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as granted the defendant's motion for a protective order is dismissed; and it is further,
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.
The appeal from so much of the order as granted the defendant's motion for a protective order is dismissed, since an order made upon an application to review objections raised at an examination before trial is not appealable as of right ( see, Rockwood Natl. Corp. v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell Co., 59 A.D.2d 573; Cruz v. Roman Catholic Church For Most Holy Trinity, 222 A.D.2d 395; Jackson v. St. John's Episcopal Hosp. Smithtown, 220 A.D.2d 484). The plaintiff did not request permission to appeal, and we decline to sua sponte grant the plaintiff leave to appeal.
The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs application to disqualify the law firm of Rider, Weiner, Frankel Calhelha, P. C., from representing the defendant and/or the corporation in this action. As the court accurately observed, the central issue in this action is whether the parties entered into a binding and enforceable stock transfer agreement in or about June 1994. Since the law firm was not retained by the defendant until August 1994, the firm did not represent the interests of the corporation or of any party at the time the purported agreement was made, nor did any of its members participate in the negotiation of the agreement or witness any relevant events pertaining to its creation. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff failed to set forth a viable basis for disqualification of the law firm.
The plaintiffs remaining contention is without merit.
O'Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.