GRIMES v. FIGUEROA (2025)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Natasha GRIMES, etc., appellant, v. Reinaldo FIGUEROA, etc., respondent, et al., defendants.

2023-03061

Decided: May 07, 2025

HECTOR D. LASALLE, P.J., WILLIAM G. FORD, HELEN VOUTSINAS, DONNA–MARIE E. GOLIA, JJ.

The Fitzgerald Law Firm, P.C., Yonkers, NY (John M. Daly and James P. Fitzgerald of counsel), for appellant. Rubin Paterniti Gonzalez Rizzo Kaufman LLP, New York, NY (Jonathan Waldauer of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Linda Kevins, J.), dated February 8, 2023. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for leave to renew her opposition to the motion of the defendant Reinaldo Figueroa pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(8) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him for lack of personal jurisdiction, which had been granted in an order of the same court dated December 6, 2021.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal must be dismissed as academic in light of our determination on a related appeal (see Grimes v. Figueroa, ––– AD3d –––– [Appellate Division Docket No. 2021–09347; decided herewith]).

LASALLE, P.J., FORD, VOUTSINAS and GOLIA, JJ., concur.

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Out of date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