Perez v. Perez

• Decision Date: 30 April 1984
• Citation: Perez v. Perez, 474 N.Y.S.2d 989, 100 A.D.2d 962 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)
• Parties: Richard PEREZ, Appellant, v. Joan PEREZ, Respondent. Joan PEREZ, Respondent, v. Richard PEREZ, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 989

474 N.Y.S.2d 989

100 A.D.2d 962

Richard PEREZ, Appellant, v. Joan PEREZ, Respondent.

Joan PEREZ, Respondent, v. Richard PEREZ, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

April 30, 1984.

Clifford, O'Brien, Freeman & Gallagher, Larchmont (Dennis W. Gallagher, Larchmont, of counsel), for appellant.

Before MOLLEN, P.J., and TITONE, LAZER and MANGANO, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In a matrimonial action, the husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered November 18, 1982, which granted the wife's application for an upward modification of the support and maintenance provisions in the parties' judgment of divorce to the extent that it directed that a hearing shall be held to determine the issues raised by the papers.

Appeal dismissed, sua sponte, without costs or disbursements.

An order directing a judicial hearing to aid in the disposition of a motion does not affect a substantial right (see CPLR 5701, subd. [a], par. 2, cl. [v] ), and is therefore not appealable as of right (see Warner v. Warner, 88 A.D.2d 639, 450 N.Y.S.2d 225; Sklarin v. Sklarin, 86 A.D.2d 606, 447 N.Y.S.2d 681; Bagdy v. Progresso Foods Corp., 86 A.D.2d 589, 446 N.Y.S.2d 137). The instant appeal is therefore dismissed. Any party aggrieved by the order entered subsequent to the hearing may take an appeal (see Warner v. Warner, supra; Sklarin v. Sklarin, supra ).