BAKER, SANDERS, BARSHAY, GROSSMAN, FASS, MUHLSTOCK & NEUWORTH, LLC, PLAINTIFF/COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT-res, v. COMPREHENSIVE MENTAL ASSESSMENT & MEDICAL CARE, P.C. DEFENDANTS/ COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFFSAPPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS def; DAVID BARSHAY, ADDITIONAL COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT ADDITIONAL COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANTS (AND THIRD-PARTY ACTIONS). (INDEX NO. 16008/07)

BAKER, SANDERS, BARSHAY, GROSSMAN, FASS, MUHLSTOCK & NEUWORTH, LLC, PLAINTIFF/COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT-res, v. COMPREHENSIVE MENTAL ASSESSMENT & MEDICAL CARE, P.C. DEFENDANTS/ COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFFSAPPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS def; DAVID BARSHAY, ADDITIONAL COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT ADDITIONAL COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANTS (AND THIRD-PARTY ACTIONS). (INDEX NO. 16008/07)In a consolidated action, inter alia, to recover legal fees, the defendants/counterclaim plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Warshawsky, J.), entered May 16, 2011, as denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) (3) and 1025 to dismiss the second amended verified complaint on the ground that the plaintiff/counterclaim defendant had no legal capacity to sue and granted those branches of the cross motion of the additional counterclaim defendant David Barshay pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) which were to dismiss their first through eighth counterclaims insofar as asserted against him, and the additional counterclaim defendant David Barshay cross-appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of the same order as denied that branch of his cross motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) which was to dismiss the ninth counterclaim of the defendants/ counterclaim plaintiffs insofar as asserted against him.

ORDERED that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provisions thereof granting those branches of the cross motion of the additional counterclaim defendant David Barshay pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) which were to dismiss the first through eighth counterclaims of the defendants/ counterclaim plaintiffs insofar as asserted against him, and substituting therefor a provision denying those branches of the cross motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, with one bill of costs payable by the additional counterclaim defendant David Barshay to the defendants/ counterclaim plaintiffs, and one bill of costs payable by the defendants/ counterclaim plaintiffs to the plaintiff/ counterclaim defendant.