Case ID: ad3d_1/html/0180-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ricardo Torres et al., Respondents, v West Street Realty Company et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants. Apartment Furniture Rentals Associates, Third-Party Defendant-Appellant, et al., Third-Party Defendant.
    [ 766 NYS2d 847]
   Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barry Salman, J.), entered April 4, 2003, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for an order compelling defendants and third-party defendant to permit the inspection of a certain loading dock and platform, unanimously dismissed as moot, with one bill of costs payable by defendants-appellants to plaintiffs.

Appellants’ claim that the court erred in granting plaintiffs’ motion for inspection of the accident site after a note of issue had already been filed is moot because they did not seek or obtain a stay of the court’s order, and plaintiffs’ expert has already inspected the subject premises. In any event, there were extraordinary circumstances in this case justifying a post-note-of-issue inspection for the purpose of opposing defendants’ summary judgment motion, which was also post-note-of-issue (compare Boisvert v Town of Grafton, 131 AD2d 910 [1987]). Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Ellerin, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.