This article examines Dinunzio v. Zylinski, 175 A.D.3d 1079 (4th Dept. 2019), wherein a sharply divided court (3-2) reviewed the applicability of subject of contest to the process by which a court granted a party’s unopposed application to waive the right to counsel and proceed pro se, to wit, that the application was timely, knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. While a previous two-part article studied aggrievement in depth (E. Scheinberg, “CPLR 5511, The Pitfalls of Aggrievement, Beyond the Basics,” NYLJ (Part I, Aug. 30, 2018 and Part II, Aug. 31, 2018), this article here maps out the fundamental principles of aggrievement required to understand Dinunzio, and then delves into an analysis of the decision.

An appellant must satisfy three jurisdictional predicates before the Appellate Division may entertain the merits of the appeal: aggrievement (CPLR 5511); appealable paper (CPLR 5512) and timeliness (CPLR 5513). CPLR 5511 states, in pertinent part: “An aggrieved party or a person substituted for him may appeal from any appealable judgment or order except one entered upon the default of the aggrieved party.”