Appeals of interlocutory orders to the Appellate Division are liberally permitted under CPLR 5701(a), a real benefit when an important matter needs review prior to final judgment.1 But it often is unnecessary to take such an appeal, because CPLR 5501 provides a broad scope of review on an appeal from a final judgment. Such an appeal will bring up for review all the prior, non-final orders in the case, so long as they “necessarily affect the final judgment,” and have not been previously reviewed on appeal.
The CPLR 5501 requirement that a reviewable prior order have some impact on the final judgment seems reasonable enoughan innocuous legislative effort to inhibit appeals on academic matters. (Why waste the court’s time on review of issues that don’t impact the judgment?) In practice, however, this provision actually promotes inefficiency, risk and unnecessary appeals, as is made clear in a recent decision by the Court of Appeals in Siegmund Strauss Inc. v. East 149th Realty.2
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
