On January 21, 2026, the Second Department issued a decision in Sharma v. Mullins, 2026 NY Slip Op. 00276, holding that someone who is not an aggrieved party cannot appeal, even if the decision has language or reasoning adverse to them, explaining:
A person is aggrieved within the meaning of CPLR 5511 when he or she asks for relief but that relief is denied in whole or in part or when someone asks for relief against him or her, which the person opposes, and the relief is granted in whole or in part. Here, Mullins and Zavarella appeal from so much of the order as granted that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to disqualify counsel for another defendant. Notwithstanding the fact that Mullins and Zavarella opposed that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion, they were not aggrieved by so much of the order as granted that branch of the motion because the plaintiffs did not seek, and the order did not grant, any relief against them.
The remaining contentions of Mullins and Zavarella also are not properly before this Court. The mere fact that an order contains language or reasoning that a party deems adverse to its interests does not furnish a basis for standing to take an appeal. Further, findings of fact and conclusions of law that do not grant or deny relief are not independently appealable.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).