The New York Appellate Division has dismissed an appeal in the case of Redmond v. LIFEplan CCO NY, LLC. This decision affects the parties involved, including plaintiffs Mary Beth Redmond and Jaime Madden, and defendants LIFEplan CCO NY, LLC, and others. The dismissal comes after a stipulation of discontinuance was signed by the attorneys for both parties.

The case, filed under docket number 745 CA 26-00583, was originally brought before the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department. The court ruled on November 13, 2026, and the decision is significant for those involved in the ongoing legal matters surrounding this case.

Background

The plaintiffs in this case, Mary Beth Redmond and Jaime Madden, initiated legal action against several defendants, including LIFEplan CCO NY, LLC, Coordinated Care Alliance NY, Inc., Advance Care Alliance of NY, Inc., and individuals Nick Cappoletti, John Von Ahn, and Dean Johnston. The nature of the dispute involves claims made by the plaintiffs against the defendants, although specific details about the claims were not provided in the court filing.

The case reached the Appellate Division after the defendants sought to sever the claims against them, which means they wanted the court to separate their case from that of the other defendants. The Supreme Court of Oneida County, presided over by Judge Mark R. Rose, denied this motion on December 31, 2025. This denial led to the appeal by the defendants, who sought to challenge the lower court's decision.

The Ruling

The Appellate Division, comprised of Justices Montour, Ogden, Greenwood, Nowak, and Hannah, ultimately dismissed the appeal. The dismissal was based on a stipulation of discontinuance signed by the attorneys for both parties on August 5, 2026. The court's ruling indicates that the appeal was unanimously dismissed without costs.

The court ruled, "It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation."

This ruling effectively ends the appeal process for the defendants in this case. The court did not provide additional comments or reasoning for the dismissal in the opinion text.

Impact

The dismissal of the appeal means that the previous ruling by the Supreme Court of Oneida County stands, and the defendants will not have the opportunity to challenge that decision further in this case. This outcome may have implications for how the case proceeds in the lower court, although specific details about the next steps were not provided in the court filing.

This case highlights the legal complexities that can arise in civil litigation, particularly when multiple parties are involved. The decision to dismiss the appeal may also serve as a reminder for parties to consider the potential consequences of pursuing appeals, especially when a stipulation of discontinuance is involved.

What's Next

Details about any further proceedings in the lower court were not available in the court filing. It is unclear whether the defendants plan to pursue any other legal actions related to this case or if there are any related cases pending.