The spirit of existentialism spills into the byzantine labyrinth of “finality”, “implied severance” and “necessarily affects the final judgment” in appellate procedure. In Rivera v. Skanska USA Civ. Northeast, 2020 NY Slip Op 00094 (1st Dept. 2020), the First Department dismissed an appeal from an order issued prior to the final judgment, on the ground of finality, where the aggrieved party, presumably unaware of the morass behind the superficially innocuous term “non-final” in CPLR 5501(a)(1), waited to appeal the order from the final judgment rather than take an immediate appeal.

These three complex principles are interwoven. Background necessary to this review derives from the 2012 Report Prepared by the Committee on Civil Practice Law and Rules, Proposed Amendment to CPLR 5501, an Affirmative Legislative Proposal of the New York State Bar Association, which tracks their statutory and decisional trajectories.

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

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]