AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

HAL ZOREF et al., Respondents, v. ANDREA GLASSMAN, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

An order directing a hearing to aid in the determination of a motion and cross motion does not dispose of the motion or cross motion and does not affect a substantial right, and therefore is not appealable as of right ( see CPLR 5701 [a] [2] [v]; see also Kornblum v Kornblum, 34 AD3d 749, 751; D'Agnese v Spinelli, 308 AD2d 561, 562; Rosen v Swarzman, 296 AD2d 392, 393). Any party aggrieved by an order entered subsequent to the hearing may take an appeal ( see Davidson-Sakuma v Sakuma, 280 AD2d 577, 577-578). Since leave to appeal has not been granted, we dismiss the appeal.

The Supreme Court's finding that the mortgage servicing agent received funding for the total amount of the loan prior to the mortgage closing is a finding of fact which is not independently appealable ( see Clark v Weiner, 254 AD2d 322).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

ZOREF v. GLASSMAN
(Oct 30, 2007)