From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Romaro Corp. v. Sea & Sky Garden, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 21, 2003
304 A.D.2d 742 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-04964

Submitted March 28, 2003.

April 21, 2003.

In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring that the plaintiffs did not breach a contract with the defendants, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cammer, J.), dated May 1, 2002, which, inter alia, granted the plaintiffs' motion to direct them to file a subdivision application and denied that branch of their motion which was to quash and/or modify a subpoena duces tecum.

Gleich, Siegel Farkas, Great Neck, N.Y. (Stephan B. Gleich and Doran I. Golubtchik of counsel), for appellants.

Wachtel Masyr, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Vladimir Zlobinsky of counsel), for respondents.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, STEPHEN G. CRANE, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed as academic, with costs.

The Supreme Court directed the defendants to file a subdivision application and, in effect, denied that branch of the defendants' motion which was to prevent the plaintiffs from taking the deposition of Steven Levine and obtaining certain documents. No stay of this order was obtained, and the defendants have since filed the subdivision application, and produced Levine and the relevant documents pursuant to the subpoena duces tecum. Under these circumstances, the relief sought by the defendants is no longer available and any determination by this court will not affect the rights of the parties with respect to this action (cf. Matter of Grand Jury Subpoenas for Locals 17, 135, 257 608 of United Bd. of Carpenters Joiners of Am., AFL-CIO [People], 72 N.Y.2d 307, 311, cert denied 488 U.S. 966). The present circumstances do not warrant application of an exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714-715; Matter of Congregation Bnei Yoel v. Monroe-Woodbury Cent. School Dist., 258 A.D.2d 582; People ex rel. Smalls v. Tekben, 193 A.D.2d 828). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed as academic.

SANTUCCI, J.P., KRAUSMAN, CRANE and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Romaro Corp. v. Sea & Sky Garden, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 21, 2003
304 A.D.2d 742 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Romaro Corp. v. Sea & Sky Garden, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ROMARO CORP., ET AL., respondents, v. SEA SKY GARDEN, INC., ET AL.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 21, 2003

Citations

304 A.D.2d 742 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
757 N.Y.S.2d 771

Citing Cases

Yemini) v. Goldberg

Despite the parties' contentions to the contrary, this case does not warrant the invocation of the exception…

Investors, Ltd. v. Brennan (In re Street)

The petitioners appeal from both orders.Inasmuch as we denied the petitioners' motion, inter alia, to stay…