Case Name: Timothy Hogue et al., Appellants, v. Kenilworth Apartments, Inc., Respondent, et al., Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-05-19
Citations: 139 A.D.3d 529
Docket Number: 
Parties: Timothy Hogue et al., Appellants, v Kenilworth Apartments, Inc., Respondent, et al., Defendants.
Judges: Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 139
Pages: 529–530

Head Matter:
Timothy Hogue et al., Appellants, v Kenilworth Apartments, Inc., Respondent, et al., Defendants.
[30 NYS3d 548]

Opinion:
Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Manuel J. Mendez, J.), entered May 7, 2015, which denied defendant cooperative's motion for a preliminary injunction, unanimously dismissed, with costs, as moot.
The individual defendants moved to dismiss this appeal as against them as moot based on the motion court's October 23, 2015 order dismissing the action as against them, and this Court granted that motion (Hogue v Kenilworth Apts., Inc., 2016 NY Slip Op 60099[U] [2016]). However, the cooperative defendant failed to join in the motion and the appeal as to it continued (id.). Although the parties do not raise the issue, we now dismiss the appeal as against the cooperative defendant as moot (see People ex rel. Allen v Warden, GMDC, N.Y. State Div. of Parole, 61 AD3d 541, 542 [1st Dept 2009]), given the cooperative's removal of the items and performance of the hallway renovations that plaintiffs' unsuccessful application for injunctive relief had sought to prevent. None of the exceptions to the mootness doctrine apply here (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715 [1980]).
Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.