Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025

Baldo v. McDonald

Baldo v. McDonald
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided October 3, 2025
2025 NY Slip Op 05372
Baldo v. McDonald

Opinion

Baldo v McDonald (2025 NY Slip Op 05372)

Baldo v McDonald
2025 NY Slip Op 05372
Decided on October 3, 2025
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on October 3, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: LINDLEY, J.P., MONTOUR, GREENWOOD, NOWAK, AND KEANE, JJ.

655 CA 24-00979

[*1]ANGELA BALDO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

v

JOHN M. MCDONALD, MICHAEL D. TEAL, AND KIMBERLY TEAL, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 1.)




D.J. & J.A. CIRANDO, PLLC, SYRACUSE (REBECCA L. KONST OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.

SCHWERZMANN & WISE, P.C., WATERTOWN (KEITH B. CAUGHLIN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.



Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Lewis County (James P. McClusky, J.), dated November 30, 2023, in an action pursuant to RPAPL article 15. The order, inter alia, directed plaintiff not to interfere with defendants' use of the subject right-of-way.

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs (see Hughes , Nussbaumer , Clarke & Velzy , 140 AD2d 988, 988 [4th Dept 1988]; Chase Manhattan Bank , N.A. v Roberts & Roberts , 63 AD2d 566, 567 [1st Dept 1978]; see also CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

Entered: October 3, 2025

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court



Opinion

Baldo v McDonald (2025 NY Slip Op 05372)

Baldo v McDonald
2025 NY Slip Op 05372
Decided on October 3, 2025
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on October 3, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: LINDLEY, J.P., MONTOUR, GREENWOOD, NOWAK, AND KEANE, JJ.

655 CA 24-00979

[*1]ANGELA BALDO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

v

JOHN M. MCDONALD, MICHAEL D. TEAL, AND KIMBERLY TEAL, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 1.)




D.J. & J.A. CIRANDO, PLLC, SYRACUSE (REBECCA L. KONST OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.

SCHWERZMANN & WISE, P.C., WATERTOWN (KEITH B. CAUGHLIN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.



Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Lewis County (James P. McClusky, J.), dated November 30, 2023, in an action pursuant to RPAPL article 15. The order, inter alia, directed plaintiff not to interfere with defendants' use of the subject right-of-way.

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs (see Hughes , Nussbaumer , Clarke & Velzy , 140 AD2d 988, 988 [4th Dept 1988]; Chase Manhattan Bank , N.A. v Roberts & Roberts , 63 AD2d 566, 567 [1st Dept 1978]; see also CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

Entered: October 3, 2025

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court



Opinion

Baldo v McDonald (2025 NY Slip Op 05372)

Baldo v McDonald
2025 NY Slip Op 05372
Decided on October 3, 2025
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on October 3, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: LINDLEY, J.P., MONTOUR, GREENWOOD, NOWAK, AND KEANE, JJ.

655 CA 24-00979

[*1]ANGELA BALDO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

v

JOHN M. MCDONALD, MICHAEL D. TEAL, AND KIMBERLY TEAL, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 1.)




D.J. & J.A. CIRANDO, PLLC, SYRACUSE (REBECCA L. KONST OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.

SCHWERZMANN & WISE, P.C., WATERTOWN (KEITH B. CAUGHLIN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.



Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Lewis County (James P. McClusky, J.), dated November 30, 2023, in an action pursuant to RPAPL article 15. The order, inter alia, directed plaintiff not to interfere with defendants' use of the subject right-of-way.

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs (see Hughes , Nussbaumer , Clarke & Velzy , 140 AD2d 988, 988 [4th Dept 1988]; Chase Manhattan Bank , N.A. v Roberts & Roberts , 63 AD2d 566, 567 [1st Dept 1978]; see also CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

Entered: October 3, 2025

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court



Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.