WILLIAMS v. ORANGE COUNTY (2026)

DECISION & ORDER

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for battery, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (David S. Zuckerman, J.), dated December 5, 2024.  The order granted the unopposed motion of the defendants Orange County, Orange County Sheriff's Department, Paul Artetea, Deputy Narcise, Deputy Capilli, and Deputy Capilli pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

In September 2024, the plaintiff commenced this action, inter alia, to recover damages for battery against the defendants Orange County, Orange County Sheriff's Department, Paul Artetea, Deputy Narcise, Deputy Capilli, and another individual also denominated Deputy Capilli (hereinafter collectively the defendants), among others.  The defendants moved pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them, contending, among other things, that the action was barred by the statute of limitations.  The plaintiff did not oppose the defendants' motion.  In an order dated December 5, 2024, the Supreme Court granted the defendants' motion.  The plaintiff appeals.

A person is aggrieved within the meaning of CPLR 5511 “when he or she asks for relief but that relief is denied in whole or in part,” or “when someone asks for relief against him or her, which the person opposes, and the relief is granted in whole or in part” (Mixon v TBV, Inc., 76 AD3d 144, 156–157 [emphasis and footnote omitted];  see Estella v Val Auto, LLC, 221 AD3d 967, 967–968).  Here, since the plaintiff did not oppose the defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them, the plaintiff is not aggrieved by the order appealed from.  Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed (see CPLR 5511).

CHAMBERS, J.P., DOWLING, WAN and VENTURA, JJ., concur.