MADIGAN v. Oceana Holding Corp., Respondent. (2022)

Court of Appeals of New York.

Faye T. MADIGAN, etc., Appellant, v. BERKELEY CAPITAL LLC, et al., Defendants, Rosa Bronstein, et al., Respondents, Oceana Holding Corp., Respondent.

Decided: October 20, 2022

Appeal, insofar as taken by Faye T. Madigan from so much of the Appellate Division order as granted that branch of the motion to hold plaintiff's counsel in criminal contempt, dismissed without costs, by the Courtsua sponte, upon the ground that she is not a party aggrieved (see CPLR 5511); appeal otherwise dismissed without costs, by the Court sua sponte, upon the ground that the remaining portion of the order does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network