Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Russell SNOW, etc., respondent, v. INTERFAITH MEDICAL CENTER, et al., defendants; Gotham Staffing, LLC, etc., et al., nonparty-appellants.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for medical malpractice, nonparties Gotham Staffing, LLC, and Adelaida Sarmiento–Villaroman appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bernard J. Graham, J.), dated April 22, 2021. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied the defendants’ cross-motion to compel the plaintiff to serve a certificate of merit and notice of medical malpractice in a related action and to transfer the related action from the general negligence part to the medical malpractice part.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.
Nonparties Gotham Staffing, LLC, and Adelaida Sarmiento–Villaroman (hereinafter together the appellants) appeal from so much of an order as denied the defendants’ cross-motion to compel the plaintiff to serve a certificate of merit and notice of medical malpractice in a related action and to transfer the related action from the general negligence part to the medical malpractice part.
The appellants are not aggrieved by that order because the order neither denied relief they requested nor granted relief against them, which they opposed (see Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v. Dewar, 186 A.D.3d 826, 827, 127 N.Y.S.3d 801; Mixon v. TBV, Inc., 76 A.D.3d 144, 156–157, 904 N.Y.S.2d 132). To the extent the appellants made an affirmative request for relief before the Supreme Court, the order appealed from did not address it (see Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v. Dewar, 186 A.D.3d at 827, 127 N.Y.S.3d 801). Furthermore, neither “language or reasoning that a party deems adverse to its interests” nor “findings of fact and conclusions of law which do not grant or deny relief” provide a basis for appeal (Wunderlich v. Liberty Meadows, LLC, 189 A.D.3d 1676, 1678, 139 N.Y.S.3d 312 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Parochial Bus Sys. v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 N.Y.2d 539, 545, 470 N.Y.S.2d 564, 458 N.E.2d 1241). Accordingly, we must dismiss the appeal.
IANNACCI, J.P., CHRISTOPHER, GENOVESI and WARHIT, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 2021–05381
Decided: May 22, 2024
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)