Matter of Paraskevopoulos v Stavropoulos
2009 NY Slip Op 06556 [65 AD3d 1153]
September 15, 2009
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, November 4, 2009


In the Matter of George Paraskevopoulos,Appellant,
v
George Stavropoulos et al., Respondents.

[*1]Jerasimos Papapanayotou, Long Island City, N.Y., for appellant.

Mavromihalis & Pardalis, Astoria, N.Y. (Joseph D. Nohavicka and Anastasios Pardalis ofcounsel), for respondents.

In a consolidated proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to Not-for-Profit Corporation Law §618 to set aside the results of an election held on January 27, 2008, for the Board of Directors ofGeros Tou Morea, Inc., and pursuant to Not-for-Profit Corporation Law § 621 (b) tocompel the production of certain books and records of Geros Tou Morea, Inc., the petitionerappeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County(Hart, J.), dated September 24, 2008, as, in effect, denied that branch of the petition which was toset aside the results of the election, and directed that the next regularly scheduled election for theBoard of Directors of Geros Tou Morea, Inc., was to be conducted under the supervision of areferee, and that the parties jointly pay the referee's fee.

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as, in effect, denied that branch of thepetition which was set aside the results of the election and directed that the next regularlyscheduled election for the Board of Directors of Geros Tou Morea, Inc., was to be conductedunder the supervision of a referee is dismissed as academic; and it is further,

Ordered that order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondents.

"Courts are prohibited from rendering advisory opinions and 'an appeal will be consideredmoot unless the rights of the parties will be directly affected by the determination of the appealand the interest of the parties is an immediate consequence of the judgment' " (Funderburke v New York State Dept. ofCiv. Serv., 49 AD3d 809, 811 [2008], quoting Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne,50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980]).

So much of the order on appeal as, in effect, denied that branch of the petition which was toset aside the results of an election held on January 27, 2008, for the Board of Directors of GerosTou Morea, Inc., and directed that the next regularly scheduled election for the Board ofDirectors of Geros Tou Morea, Inc., was to be conducted under the supervision of a referee hasbeen [*2]rendered academic, as the next regularly scheduledelection contemplated by the order was conducted in January 2009 (see Matter of HellenicCultural Circle v Kotsilimbas, 35 NY2d 814 [1974]; Matter of Karakonstadakis vKokonas, 173 AD2d 706 [1991]; Litas Inv. Co. v Vebeliunas, 148 AD2d 680, 682[1989]). Additionally, this case does not warrant this Court's invocation of the exception to themootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d at 714-715).

Under the circumstances presented, to the extent that the petitioner contends that he shouldnot have been directed to pay a share of the referee's fee, the contention is without merit(see Not-for-Profit Corporation Law § 618). Fisher, J.P., Miller, Angiolillo andHall, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.