Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M39733

T/mv

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

WILLIAM F. MASTRO

MARK C. DILLON, JJ.

2005-03064, 2005-04925, 2005-08690, 2006-01773, 2006-03172 Christine Degliuomini, appellant-respondent, v Beatrice Degliuomini, respondent-appellant; Edward Harold King, nonparty-respondent. (Appeal No. 1) Christine Degliuomini, plaintiff-respondent, v Beatrice Degliuomini, appellant; Edward Harold King, nonparty-respondent. (Appeals No. 2 and 5) Christine Degliuomini, respondent, v Beatrice Degliuomini, appellant. (Appeal No. 3) Christine Degliuomini, appellant-respondent, v Beatrice Degliuomini, respondent-appellant. (Appeal No. 4) (Index No. 7230/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Separate motions by Christine Degliuomini and Beatrice Degliuomini on appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County dated April 13, 2005 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2005-04925), and two orders of the same court dated September 9, 2005 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2005-08690) and March 28, 2006 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2006-03172), respectively, and appeals and cross appeals from two orders of the same court dated February 10, 2005 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2005-03064) and February 21, 2006 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2006-01773), respectively, inter alia, to enjoin the nonparty Edward Harold King, Esq. from using the funds awarded to him as a referee's fee pending hearing and determination of the appeals. Separate motion by Beatrice Degliuomini, in effect, to recall and vacate so much of a decision and order on motion of this court entitled "In the Matter of the Dismissal of Causes for Failure to Perfect - January 2006 Calendar", dated February 10, 2006, as dismissed the appeal from the judgment dated April 13, 2005, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(e) for failure to timely perfect the same, and to reinstate that appeal. Joint application by the parties to enlarge their time to perfect the appeals from the judgment dated April 13, 2005, and the orders dated February 10, 2005, September 9, 2005, and February 21, 2006, respectively.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motions and application, and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion by Beatrice Degliuomini, in effect, to recall and vacate so much of a decision and order on motion of this court entitled "In the Matter of the Dismissal of Causes for Failure to Perfect - January 2006 Calendar", dated February 10, 2006, as dismissed the appeal from the judgment dated April 13, 2005, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(e) for failure to timely perfect the same, to reinstate that appeal, and to enlarge the time to perfect that appeal is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that so much of the decision and order on motion of this court dated February 10, 2006, as dismissed the appeal from the judgment dated April 13, 2005 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2005-04925) is recalled and vacated, and that appeal is reinstated; and it is further,

ORDERED that the separate motions by Christine Degliuomini and Beatrice Degliuomini, inter alia, to enjoin the nonparty Edward Harold King, Esq. from using the funds awarded to him as a referee's fee are denied; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branches of the joint application by the parties which are to enlarge their time to perfect the appeals from the judgment dated April 13, 2005 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2005-04925), and the orders dated February 10, 2005 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2005-03064), and September 9, 2005 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2005-08690), respectively, are granted, and the time of Beatrice Degliuomini to perfect the appeals is enlarged until June 19, 2006, and the joint record or appendix on the appeals and the brief of Beatrice Degliuomini must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,

ORDERED that the answering brief of Christine Degliuomini, including the points of argument on the cross appeals, shall be served and filed in accordance with the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the application which is to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal from the order dated March 28, 2006 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2006-03172), is denied as premature.

FLORIO, J.P., KRAUSMAN, MASTRO and DILLON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court