Vivenzio v. City of Utica
Decision Date | 27 June 1968 |
Docket Number | No. 1,1 |
Citation | 30 A.D.2d 771,292 N.Y.S.2d 310 |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Parties | Application of Rocco M. VIVENZIO, Edward F. Butler, and Eugene F. Bersani, Respondents, v. The CITY OF UTICA, New York, and the City Treasurer of Utica, New York, Louis Barile, Appellants. |
Fred Nassar, Nathan J. Siegel, Utica, for appellants.
Longeretta & Longeretta, A. Thomas Longeretta, Utica, for respondents.
Before BASTOW, P.J., and DEL VECCHIO, MARSH, WITMER and HENRY, JJ.
In this Article 78 proceeding an order was entered February 27, 1968 determining that seven stated issues of fact exist for trial and a further order was entered March 12, 1968 denying appellants' motion to strike certain paragraphs of the petition as scandalous, prejudicial, irrelevant and immaterial and for judgment dismissing the petition upon various grounds founded upon submitted documentary evidence, and appellants appeal from both of said orders.
CPLR 5701 provides in part as follows:
The two orders from which these appeals are taken fall squarely within the quoted provisions of the statute. These statutory provisions are partially an outgrowth of Civil Practice Act, section 1304 which provided that in an Article 78 proceeding there could be no appeal from a nonfinal order except by permission of the court or in conjunction with an appeal from a final order (see Matter of Fischer v. Briante, 6 A.D.2d 814, 175 N.Y.S.2d 301; Matter of Sunland Beverage Corp. v. Rohan, 6 A.D.2d 996, 177 N.Y.S.2d 732; Matter of Hotel Esplanade, Inc. v. Herman, 24 Misc.2d 1086, 200 N.Y.S.2d 157). If permission to appeal had been sought (cf. CPLR 5514(a)), we would have denied the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Altschul v. Butterfield Farms, Inc.
... ... Lomangino, Brooklyn, for petitioner-respondent ... P. I. Aaron, New York City, for respondents-appellants ... Before STEVENS, P.J., and NUNEZ, KUPFERMAN, MURPHY ... (matter of O'neill v. schechter, 12 A.D.2D 760, 210 N.Y.S.2d 444; matter of Vivenzio v. City of Utica, 30 A.D.2d 771, 292 N.Y.S.2d 310; Armour v. City of Newburgh, 26 A.D.2d 626, 272 ... ...
-
Cirasole v. Simins
... ... June 12, 1975 ... J. T. Dorfman, New York City, for petitioner-appellant ... L. Olarsch, New York City, for ... Butterfield Farms, Inc., 40 A.D.2d 654, 336 N.Y.S.2d 618; Matter of Vivenzio v. City of Utica, 30 A.D.2d 771, 292 N.Y.S.2d 310.) However, in dismissing the appeal, costs are ... ...
-
Stewart v. New York State Liquor Authority
... ... Oct. 23, 1969 ... Hyman Amsel, New York City, State Liquor Authority, Jos. F. Reina, Buffalo, for appellants ... Edward H ... the order or by permission of a Justice of the Appellate Division (CPLR 5701(c); Matter of Vivenzio v. City of Utica, 30 A.D.2d 771, 292 N.Y.S.2d 310; Matter of Soros v. Board of Appeals, 24 A.D.2d ... ...
-
Hawley v. Town of Aurora
... ... order was an intermediate one from which an appeal may not be taken without permission (Vivenzio v. City of Utica, 30 A.D.2d 771, 292 N.Y.S.2d 310; Sunland Beverage Corp. v. Rohan, 6 A.D.2d 996, ... ...