| Stober v Stober |
| Motion No: 2009-03378 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2009 NY Slip Op 85190(U) |
| Decided on October 6, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department, Motion Decision |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This motion is uncorrected and is not subject to publication in the Official Reports. |
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M92783
J/sl
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
L. PRISCILLA HALL
LEONARD B. AUSTIN, JJ.
|
2009-03378 Eliezer Stober, appellant, v Shoshana Stober, respondent. (Index No. 23009/07)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
On the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that its decision and order on motion dated July 23, 2009, in the above-entitled case is recalled and vacated, and the following decision and order on motion is substituted therefor:
Appeal by Eliezer Stober from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 26, 2009. By order to show cause dated July 8, 2009, the parties or their attorneys were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated April 17, 2009. Motion by the appellant pro se, in effect, to remove the appeal from the active case management program, to hold the appeal in abeyance pending final determination by the Supreme Court, Kings County, of the issues of custody and visitation, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal.
Now, on the court's own motion, and the papers filed in response to the order to show cause, and upon the appellant's motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the appellant's motion which is to remove the appeal from the active case management program is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the appellant's motion which is to hold the appeal in abeyance is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the appellant's motion which is to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal is granted, and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until November 30, 2009, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
SKELOS, J.P., LEVENTHAL, HALL and AUSTIN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court