| Agbh Bel Air Rental, LLC v Hilary Best |
| Motion No: 2009-02028 qc |
| Slip Opinion No: 2011 NY Slip Op 74606(U) |
| Decided on May 24, 2011 |
| Appellate Term, 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. |
of the State of New York for the 2nd, 11th & 13th judicial Districts
JOSEPH G. GOLIA, J.P.
MICHAEL L. PESCE
JAIME A. RIOS, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
| AGBH Bel Air Rental, LLC, Respondent, v Hilary Best, Appellant, and "John Doe" and "John Doe," Undertenants. |
Motion by respondent on an appeal from a final judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, entered August 7, 2009, to dismiss a purported appeal from an order of the same court entered May 5, 2009, or, in the alternative, for an enlargement of time to serve and file a respondent's brief. Separate motion by appellant, by counsel, for an enlargement of time to serve and file papers in opposition to respondent's motion. Separate motion by appellant, pro se, for an enlargement of time to serve and file papers in opposition to respondent's motion, to "release" his counsel and assign other counsel, to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal, and for leave to file a supplemental brief. Separate motion by respondent for an enlargement of time to serve and file papers in opposition to appellant's motions.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motions, it is
ORDERED that the branch of respondent's motion seeking to dismiss a purported appeal from the order entered May 5, 2009 is denied as unnecessary as no appeal has been properly taken from the May 5, 2009 order; and it is further,
ORDERED, on the court's own motion, that the appellant's brief submitted by appellant's counsel under the above-listed appeal number is stricken as the brief purports to perfect an appeal only from the May 5, 2009 order; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of respondent's motion seeking an enlargement of time to serve and file a respondent's brief is denied as academic; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion by appellant, by counsel, for an enlargement of time to serve and file papers in opposition to respondent's motion, the motion by respondent for an enlargement of time to serve and file papers in opposition to appellant's motions and the branch of the motion by appellant, pro se, for an enlargement of time to serve and file papers in opposition to respondent's motion are granted and all of the opposing papers are deemed timely served and filed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the remainder of the motion by appellant, pro se, is granted only to the extent of enlarging appellant's time to submit a new appellant's brief until August 5, 2011; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the appeal is not perfected by August 5, 2011, the court, on its own motion, may dismiss the appeal or respondent may move to dismiss the appeal on three days' notice, and may serve such application in person.
ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk