Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M204710

E/sl

CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P.

SHERI S. ROMAN

SANDRA L. SGROI

BETSY BARROS, JJ.

2014-10523, 2015-11016 Nella Manko, appellant, v David A. Gabay, et al., respondents, et al., defendants. (Index No. 22148/13)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant pro se to waive compliance with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 670.10.2(f) regarding certification of the appellant's appendix on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 9, 2014, and October 8, 2014, respectively, for poor person relief, and to waive the motion filing fee. Separate motion by the appellant pro se to waive the filing fee for the appeals or to enlarge her time to pay the fee, and to waive the motion filing fee. Application by the respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief. Separate application by the respondents to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appellant's appendix is inadequate.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion to waive compliance with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 670.10.2(f) regarding certification of the appellant's appendix, for poor person relief, and to waive the motion filing fee and the papers filed in opposition thereto, upon the papers filed in support of the motion for poor person relief, and to waive the motion filing fee and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the applications and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to waive compliance with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 670.10.2(f) regarding certification of the appellant's appendix is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branches of the motions which are to waive the filing fee for the appeals are denied as academic as the filing fee was paid; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branches of the motions which are to waive the motion filing fee are denied as unnecessary (see CPLR 8022[b]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the motions are otherwise denied; and it is further,

ORDERED that the application to enlarge the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is granted, the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 16, 2016, and the respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,

ORDERED that the application to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appellant's appendix is inadequate is dismissed without prejudice to making a motion for that relief.

CHAMBERS, J.P., ROMAN, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court