Opinion
2011-12-13
James KNAPP et al., Respondents–Appellants, v. James R. HUGHES, et al., Appellants–Respondents.
Reported below, 25 A.D.3d 886, 808 N.Y.S.2d 791.
Motion by defendants for leave to appeal granted. Motion by plaintiffs for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that it does not lie, plaintiffs previously having moved for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the January 2006 Appellate Division order from which leave to appeal is currently sought (7 N.Y.3d 921, 827 N.Y.S.2d 690, 860 N.E.2d 992 [2006] ). Moreover, no motion by plaintiffs for leave to appeal would lie to this Court from the July 2011 Supreme Court judgment to bring up for review the January 2006 Appellate Division order as plaintiffs have appealed that judgment to the Appellate Division and simultaneous appeals do not lie to both the Appellate Division and the Court of Appeals (see Parker v. Rogerson, 35 N.Y.2d 751, 753, 361 N.Y.S.2d 916, 320 N.E.2d 650 [1974] ).