APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8757
CF/
|
2003-10748 Chemical Bank, etc., plaintiff-respondent, v Chase Manhattan Bank, et al., respondents, 8201 Realty Associates, appellant. (Index No. 29727/03)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal |
Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 10, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8753
CF/
|
2003-08578 Copelco Capital, Inc., respondent, v JHD Rapid Color Print, Inc., et al., appellants. (Index No. 27954/98)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal |
Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 15, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8754
CF/
|
2003-08580 Copelco Capital, Inc., respondent, v JHD Rapid Color Print, Inc., et al., appellants. (Index No. 27954/98)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal |
Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 28, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8761
CF/
|
2003-11058 Marie Corrigan, et al., respondents, v 39-02 Little Neck Grocery Corp., d/b/a Whistle Stop Market, appellant. (Index No. 11669/01)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal |
Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 31, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8713
O/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
HOWARD MILLER
THOMAS A. ADAMS
SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.
|
2002-05628 Culinary Connection Holdings, Inc., respondent, et al., defendants, v Culinary Connection of Great Neck, Inc., etc., et al., appellants, et al., defendants. (Index No. 4747/95)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Separate motions by the respondent Culinary Connections Holdings, Inc., and the appellants for leave to reargue an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 21, 2000, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated November 24, 2003, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the decision and order of this court.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motions and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motions are denied.
ALTMAN, J.P., H. MILLER, ADAMS and TOWNES, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8743
CF/
|
2003-10750 Robert Dechnik, respondent, v Sofia Realty, LLC, et al., defendants, Metal Crafts by N. Barsily, Inc., appellant. (Index No. 33925/99)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal |
Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 28, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8732
PL/sl
|
2003-02330 ORDER ON APPLICATION Angelo Delgrande, respondent, v County of Westchester, et al., appellants. (Index No. 13911/96)
|
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated February 6, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before April 3, 2004.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8725
S/sl
|
2003-07626 Rosa Denning, respondent, v New York City Transit Authority, appellant. (Index No. 50623/01)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 20, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until April 26, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8730
PL/sl
|
2003-07943, 2003-07944 Estate of Anita C. Smith, etc., et al., appellants, v Wendy's International, Inc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 13862/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both dated July 31, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until May 3, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeals and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8742
CF/
|
2003-09993 Stephen Geraci, respondent, v Richard Romeo, appellant. (Index No. 31779/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal |
Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated September 30, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8766
CF/
|
2003-06677 Laura Golstein, respondent, v Federated Department Stores, Inc., et al., appellants. (Index No. 19142/00)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal |
Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated June 25, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8686
S/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2003-00638 Santiago Hernandez, respondent, v Gloria Yuen, appellant. (Index No. 10181/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
The defendant having appealed to this court from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 22, 2002, and having perfected the appeal on August 22, 2003, and no brief having been filed by the respondent, the matter was placed on this court's calendar for January 7, 2004. By letter dated January 5, 2004, counsel for the appellant notified this court that the case had settled in June 2003, prior to the perfection of the appeal, and that the appellant was now withdrawing the appeal. By order to show cause dated January 23, 2004, the parties or their counsel were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered imposing such sanctions and/or costs, if any, against the parties to the appeal or their respective counsel pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.2(g) as this court may deem appropriate for failing to timely notify the court that the case had been settled.
Now, on the court's own motion, and on the papers filed in response to the order to show cause, it is
ORDERED that within 20 days after service upon it of a copy of this decision and order on motion, the law firm of Cheven, Keely & Hatzis , counsel for the appellant, is directed to pay a sanction in the sum of $1,000 to the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, shall enter judgment accordingly (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.2); and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, shall serve a copy of this decision and order on motion upon counsel for the parties by regular mail.
Section 670.2(g) of the rules of this court provides, in relevant part, that "[i]f a cause or the underlying action is wholly or partially settled * * * the parties or their counsel shall immediately notify the court," and "[a]ny attorney or party who, without good cause shown, fails to comply with the requirements of this subdivision shall be subject to the imposition of such costs and/or sanctions as the court may direct" (22 NYCRR 670.2[g]).
Under the circumstances, the excuse proffered by the attorney for the appellant for failing to notify this court that the case had been settled does not constitute good cause and warrants the imposition of a sanction in the amount indicated.
ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8711
S/sl
|
2003-08181 Laura Holtz, appellant, v Y. Darek Taxi, Inc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 3975/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated July 25, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 10, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8744
CF/
|
2003-06171 Honest Management Company, LLC, respondent, v ABC Home Restaurants, Inc., et al., appellants. (Index No. 9214/00)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal |
Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated June 17, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8703
O/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT
SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.
|
2003-01766, 2003-04208 Adrienne Marsh Lefkowitz, appellant, v Bergman, Horowitz & Reynolds, respondents. (Index No. 13477/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant, inter alia, to withdraw appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered January 15, 2003, and April 28, 2003, respectively.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to withdraw the appeals is granted and the appeals are marked withdrawn; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied.
FLORIO, J.P., KRAUSMAN, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8690
M/mv
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-10384
Bernard Lory, appellant, v Neil Parsoff, et al., respondents. (Index No. 1250/99)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated September 16, 2003.
On the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that the appeal under Appellate Division Docket No. 2003-10384 is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as it is a duplicate of an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated September 16, 2003, in the above-entitled action, which was perfected on February 26, 2004, under Appellate Division Docket No. 2003-10191.
ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, KRAUSMAN and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8702
S/sl
|
2003-07099 Lucy Marino, appellant, v State of New York, respondent. (Claim No. 99711)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims, dated July 8, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 4, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8717
S/sl
|
2003-06797 Martin A. McIntosh, et al., appellants, v City of New York, et al., respondents. (Index No. 109/92)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated June 18, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 30, 2004, and the respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8759
CF/
|
2004-00670 Micro Connection, Inc., plaintiff-respondent, v Marty Kipness, defendant-respondent; AMC Computer Corp., appellant. (Index No. 6548/99)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal |
Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated December 15, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8716
E/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-10112
Hurshed Mulladzanov, et al., respondents, Faye Enterprises Corp., et al., appellants. (Index No. 4529/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant Speedy Concrete Plumbing & Repair, Inc., on appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 23, 2003, inter alia, to direct the remaining appellants to perfect their appeals by a date certain.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, KRAUSMAN and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8765
CF/
|
2003-10304 Martin Pollack, etc., appellant, v Staten Island University Hospital, respondent. (Index No. 11435/03)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Withdraw Appeal on Stipulation |
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated September 30, 2003.
Upon the stipulation of the parties, dated January 23, 2004 and January 26, 2004, it is
ORDERED that the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8712
A/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
SANDRA L. TOWNES
STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
|
2004-01176, 2004-01177 Barbara Purpura, respondent, v Nicholas E. Purpura, appellant.
(Index No. 5769/85)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se, inter alia, to stay all proceedings to impose a sanction on him, pending hearing and determination of appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated January 5, 2004 and January 21, 2004, respectively.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that on the court's own motion the appeal from the order dated January 21, 2004 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2004-01177) is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from so much of the order as denies reargument, and no appeal lies as of right from so much of the same order as directed a hearing (see Barbarita v Shilling, 115 AD2d 630), and we decline to grant leave to appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for a stay of all proceedings to impose a sanction on the appellant is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied.
RITTER, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, TOWNES and CRANE, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8739
Y/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
NANCY E. SMITH
STEPHEN G. CRANE
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-09891, 2003-09893 Naila Qureshi, appellant, v New York City Department of Education, respondent. (Index No. 5199/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant for leave to prosecute appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered August 28, 2003, and September 4, 2003, respectively, as a poor person, to waive the filing fee, and for the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
RITTER, J.P., SMITH, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8738
Y/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
NANCY E. SMITH
STEPHEN G. CRANE
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-10167 Naila Qureshi, appellant, v State Farm Insurance Company, respondent. (Index No. 6558/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant, inter alia, for leave to prosecute appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered August 29, 2003, and September 4, 2003, respectively, as a poor person, for the waiver of the filing fee, and for the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, on the ground that no appeal lies as of right from an order that does not affect a substantial right of the appealing party (see CPLR 5701 [a][2][v]), and we decline to grant leave to appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is denied as academic.
RITTER, J.P., SMITH, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8756
CF/
|
2003-09992 Michael Reddington, et al., respondents, v Richard Romeo, appellant. (Index No. 29803/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal |
Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated September 30, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8709
S/sl
|
2003-07945 Republic Franklin Insurance Company, etc., appellant, v Michael Pistill, etc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 23118/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 23, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 3, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8727
S/sl
|
2003-08061 Marietta Small, etc., appellant, v Coney Island Site 4A-1 Houses, Inc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 47532/00)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated August 8, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until April 5, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8664
A/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2004-01403 Michael Van Den Heuvel, appellant, v Low Tor Storage, Inc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 6694/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant, inter alia, to enjoin the respondents from blocking or restricting his access to a portion of his property, pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated February 6, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, KRAUSMAN and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8685
O/sl
SONDRA MILLER, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
THOMAS A. ADAMS
SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.
|
2003-10592, 2004-00835 Edward Van Steenburg, appellant, v State of New York, respondent. (Claim No. 102771)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute appeals from two orders of the Court of Claims, dated October 14, 2003, and December 24, 2003, respectively, as a poor person, for the assignment of counsel, and to consolidate the appeals.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to prosecute the appeals as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to consolidate the appeals is denied as unnecessary as the appeals may be consolidated as of right (see 22 NYCRR 670.7 [c][1]).
S. MILLER, J.P., LUCIANO, ADAMS and TOWNES, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8700
S/sl
|
2003-06392 Village of Mamaroneck, respondent, v Mamaroneck Affordable Condominium Corporation, appellant. (Index No. 11098/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated June 12, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 17, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8683
C/sl
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
ANITA R. FLORIO
BARRY A. COZIER
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2001-10271 Ingrid Wyllie, respondent, v District Attorney of County of Kings, et al., appellants. (Index No. 22477/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants James Vergano and James Campbell, inter alia, for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 10, 2001, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated December 22, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs.
PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, COZIER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8723
M/nal
|
2004-00373 In the Matter of Stuart Ain, appellant, v Beverly Ain, respondent. (Docket No. F-10899/02)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Stuart Ain from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated December 4, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 20, 2004, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or
(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.
The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is
ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are 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 the scheduling order dated January 20, 2004, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before March 22, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8724
M/nal
|
2003-11322 In the Matter of Lexsy Rosario Ayala, respondent, v Angel Ayala, appellant. (Docket No. F-6265/02)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Angel Ayala from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated November 12, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 8, 2004, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or
(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.
The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is
ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are 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 the scheduling order dated January 8, 2004, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before March 22, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8697
M/nal
|
2003-11198 In the Matter of Elizabeth Bellom, respondent, v Lawrence Bellom, appellant. (Docket No. O-14073/03)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Lawrence Bellom from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated November 26, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 23, 2004, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or
(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.
The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is
ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are 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 the scheduling order dated January 23, 2004, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before March 19, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8684
C/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2004-00548 In the Matter of Theresa Carbone, respondent, v Frank Conti, appellant. (Docket No. F-00426/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by counsel assigned to represent the appellant in a proceeding before the Family Court, Richmond County, to be relieved, for the assignment of new counsel to prosecute an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated December 18, 2003, and to grant the appellant leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition to or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the parties or their attorneys are 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 on the ground that the appeal was taken from an unsigned order (see CPLR 2219[a]), by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before April 6, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order on motion upon the parties or their attorneys; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is denied with leave to renew upon proof of service of the motion papers upon the appellant.
ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, KRAUSMAN and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8728
M/nal
|
2003-07171 In the Matter of Carla Gottlieb, respondent, v David Gottlieb, appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) (Docket No. F-1393/01) In the Matter of David Gottlieb, appellant, v Carla Gottlieb, respondent. (Proceeding No. 2) (Docket No. F-2382/01)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by David Gottlieb from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated June 30, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 12, 2004, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or
(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.
The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is
ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are 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 the scheduling order dated January 12, 2004, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before March 23, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8722
M/nal
|
2003-10803, 2003-10806 In the Matter of Tatyana V. Kondratyeva, respondent, v Joseph L. Yapi, appellant. (Docket Nos. V-11281/02, V-11282/02, O-12781-02)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeals by Joseph L. Yapi from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, both dated October 22, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 16, 2004, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeals; or
(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or
(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeals, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeals as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeals.
The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is
ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeals in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated January 16, 2004, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before March 22, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8729
M/nal
|
2003-09912 In the Matter of Margaret Lane, respondent, v Don Lane, appellant. (Docket No. F-01804-98)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Don Lane from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated October 3, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 12, 2004, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or
(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.
The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is
ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are 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 the scheduling order dated January 12, 2004, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before March 23, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8736
Y/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
HOWARD MILLER
BARRY A. COZIER
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2002-09219 In the Matter of David Larkins, petitioner, v Donald Selsky, etc., respondent. (Index No. 1387/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the petitioner to enlarge the time to perfect a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 which was transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated October 4, 2002.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted, and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the proceeding will be heard on the original papers (including the transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the briefs of the parties, who are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,
ORDERED that the petitioner's time to perfect the proceeding by causing the original papers constituting the record on the proceeding to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing his brief is enlarged until May 10, 2004.
ALTMAN, J.P., H. MILLER, COZIER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8752
M/mv
|
2003-08806, 2003-08807 In the Matter of Quanel M. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket Nos. D-09896/03, D-28030/02)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeals by the juvenile from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, both dated September 2, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeals by causing the original papers constituting the record on the appeals to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]) and by serving and filing the appellant's brief on the appeals is enlarged until March 12, 2004.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8504
M/nal
|
2004-01513 In the Matter of Carey R. Metelitz, appellant, v Lisa R. Johnson, respondent. (Docket No. F-03059/98)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Carey Metelitz from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated December 10, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal shall not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8695
M/nal
|
2004-00479 In the Matter of Fredda Mitchell, respondent, v Robert Mitchell, appellant. (Docket No. F-10711/03)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Robert Mitchell from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated December 9, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 23, 2004, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or
(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.
The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is
ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are 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 the scheduling order dated January 23, 2004, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before March 26, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8502
M/nal
|
2004-01616, 2004-01619 In the Matter of Distiny Angelina N. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Luis N. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. In the Matter of Tabettha Wanda N. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Luis N. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent (Docket Nos. B-10330/01, B-10331/01)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeals by Luis N. from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, both dated January 27, 2004. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeals in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeals; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeals, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeals as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeals; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeals to show cause why the appeals shall not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8679
M/nal
|
2003-08071, 2003-09719 In the Matter of Miral Plovnick, respondent, v Avi Klinger, appellant. (Docket No. V-03614/01)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeals by Avi Klinger from two orders of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated August 6, 2003, and October 1, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeals by causing the original papers constituting the record on the appeal to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]) and by serving and filing the appellant's brief on the appeals is enlarged until April 1, 2004.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8677
O/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2002-03309 In the Matter of Larry Porter, appellant, v Glenn S. Goord, etc., respondent. (Index No. 4546/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant, inter alia, 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 - March 2003 Calendar", dated April 3, 2003, as dismissed an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated March 4, 2002, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(e), for failure to timely perfect the same, to reinstate the appeal, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
FLORIO, J.P., SCHMIDT, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8681
O/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2002-05974 In the Matter of Larry Porter, appellant, v Glenn S. Goord, respondent. (Docket No. 3613/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant, inter alia, 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 - March 2003 Calendar", dated April 3, 2003, as dismissed an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated January 10, 2002, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(e), for failure to timely perfect the same, to reinstate the appeal, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
FLORIO, J.P., SCHMIDT, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8680
O/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2002-05979 In the Matter of Larry Porter, appellant, v Glenn S. Goord, respondent. (Docket No. 2495/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant, inter alia, 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 - March 2003 Calendar", dated April 3, 2003, as dismissed an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated November 26, 2001, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(e), for failure to timely perfect the same, to reinstate the appeal, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
FLORIO, J.P., SCHMIDT, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8678
O/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2002-05981 In the Matter of Larry Porter, appellant, v Glenn S. Goord, respondent. (Docket No. 4137/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant, inter alia, 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 - March 2003 Calendar", dated April 3, 2003, as dismissed an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated August 28, 2001, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(e), for failure to timely perfect the same, to reinstate the appeal, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
FLORIO, J.P., SCHMIDT, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8500
M/nal
|
2004-01436 In the Matter of Lauren R. (Anonymous). Child Protective Services, respondent; Denise R. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. NN-18086/03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Denise R. from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated January 27, 2004. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal shall not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M7644
M/mv
|
2003-09317, 2003-09319 In the Matter of Mahdu S. (Anonymous), appellant, v Taijwatie S. (Anonymous), respondent. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Amitra S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Mahdu S. (Anonymous), appellant; et al., respondent-respondent. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Elisa S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Mahdu S. (Anonymous), appellant; et al., respondent-respondent. (Proceeding No. 3) In the Matter of Vikram S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Mahdu S. (Anonymous), appellant; et al., respondent-respondent. (Proceeding No. 4) (Docket Nos. V-13560/01, V-13561/01, V-6831/03, N-16139-01, N-16140/01, N-16141/01, O-13301/01)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeals by Mahdu S. from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, both dated October 22, 2003. By decision and order on motion of this court dated February 3, 2004, the appellant's motion to dispense with printing and for assignment of counsel was granted, and the following named attorney was assigned to prosecute the appeals:
Andrew Calcagno, Esq.
186 Bo. Avenue East - Suite
Cranford , New Jersey 07016
(908) 272-7300
Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeals in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected either within 60 days after the receipt by the assigned counsel of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the assigned counsel shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the assigned counsel shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of any Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that the order of this court dated February 3, 2004, has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken, the date thereof, and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal shall not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8693
M/nal
|
2003-11081 In the Matter of Aminata W. (Anonymous). Westchester County Department of Social Services, respondent; Michelle W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Samori W. (Anonymous). Westchester County Department of Social Services, respondent; Michelle W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Toure W. (Anonymous). Westchester County Department of Social Services, respondent; Michelle W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3) In the Matter of Michelle W. (Anonymous). Westchester County Department of Social Services, respondent; Michelle W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 4) In the Matter of Valle W. (Anonymous). Westchester County Department of Social Services, respondent; Michelle W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 5) (Docket Nos. N-0687/01, N-0688/01, N-0689/01 N-0690/01, N-0691/01)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by the mother Michelle W. from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated January 8, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 8, 2004, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or
(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.
The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is
ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are 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 the scheduling order dated January 8, 2004, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before March 26, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8746
PL/sl
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, J.P.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, JJ.
|
1993-09684 ,1993-09685, 2004-00963, 2004-00964 The People, etc., respondent, v Lydia Montoya, a/k/a Estelle Gomez, a/k/a Aleida Gomez, appellant. (Ind No. 10518/90, 16034/91)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent, in effect, to recall and vacate a decision and order on motion of this court dated March 7, 1994, which denied the motion by the appellant pro se pursuant to CPL 460.30 for an extension of time to take appeals from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both rendered December 18, 1991, for leave to prosecute the appeals as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel, and dismissed the appeals.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that on the court's own motion its decision and order on motion dated March 4, 2004, issued under Appellate Division Docket Nos. 2004-00963 and 2004-00964 in the above-entitled case is recalled and vacated and Appellate Division Docket Nos. 2004-00963 and 2004-00964 are vacated on the ground that they are duplicates of Appellate Division Docket Nos. 1993-09684 and 1993-09685, previously assigned to this case; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is granted and this court's decision and order on motion dated March 7, 1994, in the above-entitled case is recalled and vacated, and the following decision and order is substituted therefor:
Motion by the defendant pro se pursuant to CPL 460.30 for an extension of time to take appeals from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both rendered December 18, 1991, for leave to prosecute the appeals as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion for an extension of time to take appeals from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both rendered December 18, 1991, is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the defendant's motion papers are deemed to constitute a timely notice of appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion for leave to prosecute the appeals as a poor person and the assignment of counsel is denied with leave to renew upon the filing of proper papers establishing that the appellant is entitled to poor person relief; and it is further,
ORDERED upon the court's own motion, the appellant is directed to either perfect the appeals within 60 days of the date of this order, notify the court that she has retained counsel to prosecute the appeal or intends to proceed pro se, or renew her motion for poor person relief and the assignment of counsel.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI and ALTMAN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M8692
F/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN
ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.
|
2003-10070
The People, etc., respondent, v Jay Taylor, appellant. (Ind. No. 5799/86)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
On the court's own motion, it is,
ORDERED that its decision and order on application dated February 24, 2004, in the above-entitled case is amended by deleting from the caption thereof the words "Ind. No. 5799/96" and substituting therefor the words "Ind. No. 5799/86".
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN and FLORIO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk