Turbel v Societe Generale

Turbel v Societe Generale 2007 NY Slip Op 01001 [37 AD3d 187] February 6, 2007 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Antonio Laurentino Turbel et al., Appellants,
v
Societe Generale, Respondent, et al., Defendant.

—[*1] Bolatti & Griffith, LLP, New York (Edward Griffith of counsel), for appellants. Friend & Reiskind, New York (Edwin M. Reiskind, Jr. of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered October 17, 2005, which, as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiffs' oral motion for disclosure sanctions and sua sponte limited the trial issues to those presently pleaded, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

The subject order decided a motion that was not made on notice and therefore is not appealable as of right (CPLR 5701 [a] [2]). We decline to grant leave to appeal as the record is inadequate to permit review of the issues raised in the briefs, including whether defendant's noncompliance with the order dated November 19, 2002, compelling "all specific discovery requested in [plaintiffs'] motion papers," is excusable (see Corr v Thacker, 15 AD3d 217 [2005]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Buckley and Malone, JJ.