Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
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
Advocates
Judges

KATHY T. AW, N/K/A KATHY TUN, respondent, v. ROCKY AW, appellant.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the appeal from the order dated October 10, 2002, and the appeal from so much of the order dated November 18, 2002, as directed a hearing to aid in determining the plaintiff's motion are dismissed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order dated November 18, 2002, is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff.

The appeal from the order dated October 10, 2002, and the appeal from so much of the order dated November 18, 2002, as directed a hearing to aid in determining the plaintiff's motion must be dismissed since no appeal lies as of right from an order which directs a hearing to aid in the disposition of a motion and leave to appeal has not been granted (see McKiernan v. McKiernan, 277 A.D.2d 433).

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in declining to recuse itself (see Saferstein v. Klein, 288 A.D.2d 206; cf Matter of Estate of Wiggins, 218 A.D.2d 904).

LUCIANO, J.P., ADAMS, TOWNES and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

AW v. AW
(May 5, 2003)