| AFTERMATH RESTORATION, INC. V NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, ALBERT F. STAGER, INC. DAVID DALE |
| Motion No: CA 14-01928 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2014 NY Slip Op 93198(U) |
| Decided on December 11, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth 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. |
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P. J., SMITH, CENTRA, FAHEY, AND PERADOTTO, JJ.
DOCKET NO. CA 14-01928
| AFTERMATH RESTORATION, INC., PLAINTIFF, V NEW
YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, ALBERT F. STAGER, INC., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS, DAVID DALE,
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. |
Respondents having moved to dismiss the appeal taken herein from an order of the Supreme Court entered in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Erie on July 3, 2014, on the ground that appellant failed to perfect timely the appeal, and
Appellant having cross-moved for permission to proceed as a poor person on the appeal from the order entered July 3, 2014, and having moved for the Justices of this Court to recuse themselves from this appeal and to have this appeal transferred to another Court,
Now, upon reading and filing the affidavits of Steven P. Curvin, Esq., sworn to October 24, 2014, and November 11, 2014, the affidavit of David Dale sworn to November 10, 2014, and the notices of motion and cross motion with proof of service thereof, and due deliberation having been had thereon,
It is hereby ORDERED that respondents' motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed without further order unless the appeal is perfected on or before February 9, 2015, and
It is further ORDERED that appellant's cross motion is denied insofar as it seeks for the Justices of this Court to recuse themselves and transfer this appeal (see Matter of New York State Assn. of Criminal Defense Lawyers v Kaye, 95 NY2d 556, 561; Beason v KIeine, 96 AD3d 1611, 1613; Gonzalez v L'Oreal USA, Inc., 92 AD3d 1158, 1159-1160; Modica v Modica, 15 AD3d 635, 636), and
It is further ORDERED that appellant's cross motion is denied insofar as it seeks permission to proceed as a poor person, without prejudice to appellant making a new motion that includes, among other things, an affidavit setting forth the amount and sources of his income and sufficient facts so that the merit of the contentions can be ascertained (see CPLR 1101 [a]; 22 NYCRR 1000.14 [a] [1], [2]).
Entered: December 11, 2014
Frances E. Cafarell, Clerk