Rosenberg v Regan

[*1] Rosenberg v Regan 2013 NY Slip Op 52242(U) Decided on December 31, 2013 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on December 31, 2013
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Schoenfeld, J.P., Shulman, Hunter, Jr., JJ
570279/13.

Steven N. Rosenberg, DDS, PC, Plaintiff-Respondent,

against

Margaret Regan, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Margaret A. Chan, J.), entered June 28, 2012, which granted plaintiff's motion to serve a supplemental summons and amend the complaint to add a new party defendant.

Per Curiam.

Appeal from order (Margaret A. Chan, J.) entered June 28, 2012, dismissed, without costs.

"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'" (Matter of Michael O.F., 101 AD3d 1121, 1122 [2012]), quoting Mixon v TBV, Inc., 76 AD3d 144, 156-157; see CPLR 5511). The order from which defendant purports to appeal granted plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the complaint so as to add defendant's estranged husband as a party defendant. Since plaintiff's underlying motion did not seek relief against defendant, she is not aggrieved by the ensuing order, and her appeal therefrom must be dismissed (see Finkelstein v Lincoln Nat. Corp., 107 AD3d 759, 759-760 [2013]; Euvino v Loconti, 67 AD3d 629, 630 [2009]; Caballero v Caballero, 247 AD2d 352, 352-353 [1998]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: December 31, 2013