Brady v Sintyago
2010 NY Slip Op 00463 [69 AD3d 784]
January 19, 2010
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, March 10, 2010


Michelle L. Brady, Respondent,
v
Ricardo Sintyago, Also Known as Ricardo G. Sintyago, Jr., Defendant, and Estate of Madelyn Sintyago, Appellant.

[*1] Kelly, Rode & Kelly, LLP, Mineola, N.Y. (John W. Hoefling and Stephanie Visconti of counsel), for appellant. Angiuli, Katkin & Gentile, LLP, Staten Island, N.Y. (Joelle T. Jensen and Jeannette Poyerd of counsel), for respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Estate of Madelyn Sintyago, by Ricardo Sintyago, Administrator, appeals, as limited by its brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Maltese, J.), dated November 19, 2008.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

In the order appealed from, the plaintiff's motion, which the appellant opposed, was denied. While the appellant challenges certain factual statements set forth in the order, it is not aggrieved by these statements (see CPLR 5511; Pennsylvania Gen. Ins. Co. v Austin Powder Co., 68 NY2d 465, 472-473 [1986]; Parochial Bus Sys. v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 NY2d 539, 544-545 [1983]; Sirius Am. Ins. Co. v Vigo Constr. Corp., 48 AD3d 450, 451-452 [2008]). The appellant's remaining contentions relate to parts of the order which were issued sua sponte. No appeal lies as of right from an order which does not decide a motion made on notice (see CPLR 5701 [a] [2]), and we decline to grant leave to appeal. Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Lott and Roman, JJ., concur.