Eddy
v.
Antanavige

Not overruled or negatively treated on appealinfoCoverage
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.Mar 20, 2015
3 N.Y.S.3d 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
3 N.Y.S.3d 699126 A.D.3d 14032015 N.Y. Slip Op. 2353

03-20-2015

William M. EDDY, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. David ANTANAVIGE, Defendant–Respondent.

Murray JS Kirshtein, Utica, for Plaintiff–Appellant. Longeretta Law Firm, Utica (David A. Longeretta of Counsel), for Defendant–Respondent.


Murray JS Kirshtein, Utica, for Plaintiff–Appellant.

Longeretta Law Firm, Utica (David A. Longeretta of Counsel), for Defendant–Respondent.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM:

Following a bench trial by Supreme Court in this breach of contract action, plaintiff purports to appeal from a decision stating that he is entitled to a judgment of $25,000 and interest thereon, and directing defendant's attorney to submit a proposed judgment in accordance with the terms of the decision. The appeal must be dismissed inasmuch as “[n]o appeal lies from a mere decision” (Kuhn v. Kuhn, 129 A.D.2d 967, 967, 514 N.Y.S.2d 284 ; see CPLR 5512[a] ; Plastic Surgery Group of Rochester, LLC v. Evangelisti, 39 A.D.3d 1265, 1266, 832 N.Y.S.2d 840 ), and there is no judgment in the record on appeal (see Bruno v. Vernon Park Realty, 2 A.D.2d 770, 771, 154 N.Y.S.2d 587 ; see also CPLR 5526 ; 22 NYCRR 1000.4 [a][2] ).

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CARNI, SCONIERS, and WHALEN, JJ., concur.