General
Moe Hirsch et al., Appellants, v. Peekskill Ranch, Inc., et al., Defendants, and Richard W. Fulfree, Respondent
112 A.D.2d 191·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1985·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Moe Hirsch et al., Appellants, v Peekskill Ranch, Inc., et al., Defendants, and Richard W. Fulfree, Respondent.
[MAJORITY]
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.), dated July 26, 1984, which directed that a hearing be conducted to determine the receiver’s claim for reimbursement for necessary expenditures.
Appeal dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
An order directing a judicial hearing to aid in the disposition of a motion does not affect a substantial right (see, CPLR 5701 [a] [2] [v]) and therefore is not appealable as of right (see, De Santis v De Santis, 107 AD2d 734; Warner v Warner, 88 AD2d 639; Bagdy v Progresso Foods Corp., 86 AD2d 589). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Niehoff and Rubin, JJ., concur.