Opinion
2002-10440.
Decided June 14, 2004.
In a proceeding, inter alia, to enjoin the respondent Dime Savings Bank of New York, FSB, from conducting a foreclosure sale pursuant to Uniform Commercial Code article 9, the petitioner appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O'Donoghue, J.), dated October 4, 2002, as denied her motion for a preliminary injunction to stay a foreclosure sale, inter alia, of her 290 shares of stock in Elmhurst Gardens, Inc.
Noeli Clemente Sergio, Elmhurst, N.Y., appellant pro se. Goldstein Greenlaw, LLP, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (Andrew Schwarsin of counsel), for respondents Elmhurst Gardens, Inc., and Dimension 18 Realty.
Berkman, Henoch, Peterson Peddy, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Sean R. Sexton of counsel), for respondent Dime Savings Bank of New York.
Before: A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J., DAVID S. RITTER, HOWARD MILLER, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
DECISION ORDER DECISION ORDER ON MOTION
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed as academic, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
The petitioner appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, as denied her motion for a preliminary injunction to stay a foreclosure sale, inter alia, of her 290 shares of stock of Elmhurst Gardens, Inc. The appeal is academic, because the foreclosure sale occurred after issuance of the order appealed from.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, H. MILLER and CRANE, JJ., concur.
Motion by the respondents on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 4, 2002, to strike the appellant's reply brief on the ground that it raises issues not raised in the appellant's main brief. By decision and order on motion of this court dated January 23, 2004, the motion was held in abeyance and was referred to the Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion, the papers filed in opposition thereto, and upon the argument of the appeal, it is,
ORDERED that the motion is denied as academic in view of the disposition of the appeal ( see Sergio v. Elmhurst Gardens, Inc., A.D.3d [Appellate Division Docket No. 2002-10440, decided herewith]).
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, H. MILLER and CRANE, JJ., concur.