APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9170
S/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2002-11494, 2003-05756, 2003-09196 Bank of New York, etc., respondent, v Richard J. Castaldo, et al., appellants. (Index No. 5925/99)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Application by the appellants on appeals from three orders of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated November 19, 2002, May 29, 2003, and August 21, 2003, respectively pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal from the order dated August 21, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal from the order dated August 21, 2003, is enlarged until April 21, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion the appeals from the orders dated November 19, 2002, and May 29, 2003, shall be calendared together with the appeal from the order dated August 21, 2003, and the appeals shall be argued and submitted on the same day.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9208
R/nl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.
|
2004-00606 Bank of New York, etc., plaintiff-respondent, v Jaime Ortiz, et al., appellants, et al., defendants; Kenneth Racktoo, intervenor-respondent. (Index No. 7784/98)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by Michael T. Sucher, Esq., counsel for the appellants, for leave to withdraw as counsel on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated December 22, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted, and Michael T. Sucher, Esq., is relieved from representing the appellants with respect to the instant appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that Michael T. Sucher, Esq., is directed to serve his clients with a copy of this decision and order on motion, with notice of entry, by one of the methods specified in CPLR 2103(c), on or before April 5, 2004, and shall file proof of such service with the Clerk of this court; and it is further,
ORDERED that no further proceedings shall be taken against the appellants without leave of the court, until the expiration of 30 days after service upon them of a copy of this decision and order on motion.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and TOWNES, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9122
C/nl
NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
THOMAS A. ADAMS
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2004-00937 Kathryn M. Boone, respondent, v Joel C. Bender, etc., et al., appellants. (Index No. 6792/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered January 20, 2004, inter alia, to stay enforcement of so much of the order as directed the appellants to respond to Interrogatory No. 7, pending hearing and determination of the appeal.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted to the extent that so much of the order entered January 20, 2004, as directed the appellants to respond to Interrogatory No. 7, is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal on condition that the appeal is perfected on or before April 20, 2004, and the motion is otherwise denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the appeal is not perfected on or before April 20, 2004, the court, on its own motion, may vacate the stay, or the respondent may move to vacate the stay, on three days notice.
SMITH, J.P., LUCIANO, ADAMS and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9217
J/nl
|
2003-09181 Citiwide Masonry Associates, Ltd., respondent, v Summit Renovation Corp., appellant. (Index No. 13719/97)
| 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, Richmond County, dated September 17, 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
M09198
PJL/nl
|
2003-05037 Joseph Cohen, appellant, v City of New York, et al., respondents. (Index No. 40770/96)
| 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 an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 27, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 16, 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
M9219
J/nl
|
2003-08763, 2003-08765, 2003-08766 Mary R. Davey, respondent, v Peter F. Davey, appellant.
(Index No. 10437/00)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from three orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered September 2, 2003, September 10, 2003, and September 15, 2003, respectively.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until June 1, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeals 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
M9186
J/nl
|
2003-04344 405 44th Street Realty Co., respondent, v 168 Fortune Realty, Inc., et al., defendants; Naftoli Weber, nonparty-appellant. (Index No. 23960/01)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 1, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 16, 2004, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9176
A/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2004-01599 Roy Neal Gerson, respondent, v City of New York, appellant, et al., defendants. (Index No. 26163/99)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the defendant City of New York, for leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 8, 2004, and to stay enforcement of the order pending hearing and determination of the appeal therefrom.
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 appeal to this court is denied as unnecessary, as the order is appealable as of right; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's motion papers are deemed to constitute a timely notice of appeal from the order dated January 8, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to stay enforcement of the order pending hearing and determination of the appeal is denied.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, LUCIANO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9220
S/bk
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
|
2003-01516 Veronica Hegeman, appellant, v Craig Bedford, respondent. (Index No. 384/00/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 9, 2003, for leave to serve and file a replacement reply brief.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, GOLDSTEIN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9194
J/nl
|
2003-04810 ORDER ON APPLICATION Thomas Kaiser, et al., appellants, v Bryan Delaney, et al., respondents.
(Index No. 20353/97)
|
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 of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated February 21, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before March 29, 2004.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9063
A/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
HOWARD MILLER
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2004-01714
Timothy Marano, et al., plaintiffs-respondents- appellants, v Commander Electric, Inc., defendant- third-party plaintiff-appellant-respondent, et al., defendants; York Concrete, Inc., third-party defendant-respondent-appellant. (Index No. 4902/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the defendant third-party plaintiff-appellant-respondent to stay the trial in the above-entitled action, pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated February 9, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted and the trial in the above-entitled action is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal on condition that the appeal is perfected on or before April 19, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the appeal is not perfected on or before April 19, 2004, the court, on its own motion, may vacate the stay, or the respondents-appellants may move to vacate the stay, on three days notice.
ALTMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, H. MILLER and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9147
M/nal
|
2004-02130 Navah Matis, respondent, v Ephraim Matis, appellant. (Index No. 32321/97)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Ephraim Matis from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 18, 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 action shall be perfected within 60 days after the appellant receives the transcripts of the minutes of the action in the Supreme Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received. In cases where there are no minutes to be transcribed, the appeal in the above-entitled action shall be perfected 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 in the Supreme Court action 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) 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 should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9202
S/nl
|
2003-07259 Edward McConville, et al., appellants, v Reinauer Transportation Companies, L.P., et al., respondents. (Index No. 12942/98)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated July 1, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 25, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9175
S/sl
|
2003-06542 Janessicia Moody, etc., et al., respondents, v New York City Board of Education, appellant. (Index No. 25211/01)
| 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 an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 10, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondents' brief shall be served and filed on or before April 30, 2004.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9205
J/nl
|
2003-08455 Noble Drew Ali Plaza Tenants Association, respondent, v Noble Drew Ali Plaza Housing Corp., et al., defendants, New Lots Family Transitional Center LLC, et al., defendants- appellants; City of New York, et al., intervenors-appellants. (Index No. 53655/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Applications by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 3, 2003.
ORDERED that the applications are granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until April 23, 2004, and the joint record or joint appendix on the appeals and the appellants' respective briefs must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9179
R/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2004-02043 Pipo Bar and Restaurant, Inc., respondent, v Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's at London, etc., defendant third-party plaintiff-appellant; Teotonio Branco, et al., third-party defendants- respondents.
(Index No. 4696/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to stay the trial in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered January 21, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted and the trial in the above-entitled action is stayed, pending hearing and determination of the appeal, on condition that the appeal is perfected on or before April 21, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the appeal is not perfected on or before April 21, 2004, the court, on its own motion, may vacate the stay, or the respondent may move to vacate the stay, on three days notice.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9197
PJL/nl
|
2003-08204 Erasmo Ramos, appellant, v 565 FS Equities Corp., et al., respondents. (Index No. 13928/01)
| 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 the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered August 19, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until April 19, 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
M9200
S/nl
|
2003-08749 ORDER ON APPLICATION Lynette Sanchez, respondent, v Cory Mitchell, appellant. (Index No. 1821/03)
|
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 August 15, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 21, 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
M9199
PJL/nl
|
2003-08640
Argyro Scammacca, respondent, v Paul Scammacca, appellant (Index No. 5057/00)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered August 29, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 22, 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
M9169
S/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2003-11303 Sophia Smith, etc., et al., respondents, v Ina Smith, appellant. (Index No. 3816/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated November 13, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion the stay of enforcement of the order dated November 13, 2003, granted by decision and order on motion of this court dated February 4, 2004, is vacated.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9206
O/nl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2003-10159, 2003-10160 Susan Smulczeski, appellant, v Richard Smulczeski, respondent. (Index No. 26989/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant on appeals from a judgment and an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, both dated October 22, 2003, inter alia, to appoint a new Law Guardian.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is dismissed in light of the pending motion in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for the same relief.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9193
O/nl
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
|
2004-01740 State of New York, et al., appellants, v White Oak Co., LLC, et al., respondents. (Index No. 491-04)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants, inter alia, to enjoin the respondents and their officers, members, agents, employees, contractors, or others acting on their behalf, from taking any action, including land clearing, excavation, or construction on any portion of a site located on the west side of William Floyd Parkway, the north side of Whiskey Road and the east side of Randall Road in the Hamlet of Ridge, Town of Brookhaven, that is within a 1000-foot radius of the outer boundary of a breeding pond for tiger salamanders, and a freshwater wetland located thereon that would destroy, disturb, harm, modify, or otherwise endanger the tiger salamanders or their habitat, pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated February 25, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted and the respondents and their officers, members, agents, employees, contractors, or others acting on their behalf, are enjoined from taking any action, including land clearing, excavation, or construction on any portion of a site located on the west side of William Floyd Parkway, the north side of Whiskey Road and the east side of Randall Road in the Hamlet of Ridge, Town of Brookhaven, that is within a 1000-foot radius of the outer boundary of a breeding pond for tiger salamanders, and a freshwater wetland located thereon that would destroy, disturb, harm, modify, or otherwise endanger the tiger salamanders or their habitat, pending hearing and determination of the appeal on condition that the appeal is perfected on or before April 9, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondents shall serve and file their respondents' brief on or before April 23, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellants shall serve and file their reply brief, if any, on or before April 30, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the appeal is not perfected on or before April 9, 2004, the court, on its own motion, may vacate the injunction, or the respondents may move to vacate the injunction, on three days notice.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9195
PJL/nl
|
2003-08503, 2003-08505
Sheldon Weiss , respondent, v Weinreb & Weinreb, et al., appellants. (Index No. 13438/97)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered August 21, 2003, and September 11, 2003, respectively.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until May 23, 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
M9201
S/nl
|
2003-01032, 2003-01368 Esther York, appellant, v Joseph York, respondent. (Appeal Nos. 1 and 2) 2003-01369 Esther York, appellant, v Joseph York, defendant-respondent; William York, et al., nonparty-respondents. (Appeal No. 3) (Index No. 11853/98)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on appeals from three orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated November 15, 2002, January 6, 2003, and January 8, 2003, respectively.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until March 26, 2004, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9181
J/sl
|
2003-08166 Gina Young, et al., respondents, v Johnson Tseng, et al., appellants. (Index No. 12894/00)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants 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 May 22, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 7, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9155
M/nal
2003-10717 In the Matter of Mark Ahearn, respondent, v Susan Kains, appellant. (Docket No. F-4822/02)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Susan Kains from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County, dated September 17, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 9, 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 9, 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 April 14, 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
M9191
R/nl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2003-04017, 2003-11271 In the Matter of Astoria Gas Turbine Power, LLC, appellant, v Tax Commission of the City of New York, et al., respondents. (Index No. 103911/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondents on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 10, 2003, and October 7, 2003, respectively, to dismiss the appeal from the order dated October 7, 2003, or, in the alternative, to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief.
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 dismiss the appeal from the order dated October 7, 2003, is held in abeyance, and is referred to the Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission of the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief is granted, the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 21, 2004, and the respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9151
M/nal
|
2003-11386 In the Matter of Patricia Callan, respondent, v Joseph F. Kadillak, appellant. (Docket No. F-01193/01)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Joseph F. Kadillak from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated November 5, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 9, 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 9, 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 April 13, 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
M7963
A/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
|
2003-02498, 2003-03382 In the Matter of Scott Daly, appellant, v People of the State of New York, et al., respondents. (Matter No. 1)
(Index No. 27172/02) 2003-11375
In the Matter of Scott Daly, appellant, v New York City Department of Education, etc., respondent. (Matter No. 2)
(Index No. 264/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant on appeals from three orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 11, 2002, and July 24, 2002 (Appellate Division Docket Nos. 2003-02498 and 2003-03382), and November 3, 2003 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2003-11375), respectively, to stay commencement of a proceeding pursuant to 8 NYCRR Part 83, to revoke the appellant's license to teach, pending hearing and determination of the appeals.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the appeals in Matter Nos. 1 and 2 shall be calendared and heard together, and shall be argued or submitted on the same day.
RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, GOLDSTEIN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9215
J/nl
|
2003-08066 ORDER ON APPLICATION In the Matter of Dominic Dupont, appellant, v Kings County District Attorney's Office, respondent. (Index No. 19065/03)
|
Application by the appellant 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 of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated August 14, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before March 30, 2004.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9136
M/nal
|
2003-10451 In the Matter of Dutchess County Department of Social Services, o/b/o Sharon Fleming, respondent, v George Wilson, appellant. (Docket Nos. P-5417/02, P-0533/03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by George Wilson from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated November 6, 2003. By decision and order on motion of this court dated March 9, 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 appeal:
Carol Kahn, Esq.
225 Broadway - Suite 1515
New York, New York 10007
(212) 227-0206
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 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 March 9, 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 should or should 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
M9156
M/nal
|
2003-06757 In the Matter of Hager Grossett Grenion, appellant, v Arnulfo Grossett, respondent. (Docket No. F-09404-02)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Hager Grossett Grenion from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated June 24, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 5, 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) 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 5, 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 April 13, 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
M9153
M/nal
|
2003-10842 In the Matter of Nicole J. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Social Services, respondent; Ronald J. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) (Docket No. N-04053/03) In the Matter of Lisa J. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Social Services, respondent; Ronald J. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) (Docket No. N-04054/03) In the Matter of Amanda J. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Social Services, respondent; Ronald J. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3) (Docket No. N-04055/03) In the Matter of Erika J. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Social Services, respondent; Ronald J. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 4) (Docket No. N-04056/03)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Ronald J. from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated November 5, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 9, 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 proceedings for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated January 9, 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 April 14, 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
M9144
M/nal
|
2003-03515 In the Matter of Ulawrence J. (Anonymous). Westchester County Department of Social Services, petitioner-respondent; Minerva J. (Anonymous), appellant; Claude D. (Anonymous), respondent. (Docket Nos. B-03-01, B-03-02, N-181-99-02F)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Minerva J. from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated March 3, 2003. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on March 5, 2004. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is
ORDERED that within 45 days of the date of this order, the briefs of the respondent(s) and the Law Guardian, if any, in the above-entitled appeal, shall be served and filed.
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
M9160
M/nal
|
2004-00635 In the Matter of Paulster Johnson, respondent, v Kay Semple, appellant. (Docket Nos. V-00929/90, V-00930/90)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Kay Semple from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated December 18, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 28, 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 28, 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 April 14, 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
M9095
M/nal
|
2004-01926 In the Matter of Lydia Kowalski, respondent, v Jerome Kowalski, appellant. (Docket No. F-00157-01)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Jerome Kowalski from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated March 5, 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 in 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, 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 should or should 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
M9178
E/nl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2004-01859 In the Matter of Elisa Rosenberg Krakower, respondent, v Arthur L. Krakower, appellant. (Docket No. F-05729-03/03A)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to stay enforcement of an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated February 27, 2004, pending hearing and determination of an appeal therefrom.
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., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9210
C/nl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2003-04839 In the Matter of Eric Levande, respondent, v Devorah Levande, a/k/a Devorah Shabtai, appellant. (Docket No. V-9467/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant for a preference in the calendaring of an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated May 29, 2003, and to direct the respondent and the Law Guardian to serve and file their respective briefs 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 branch of the motion which is for a preference is granted; the appeal will be calendared when it has been fully perfected ; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to direct the respondent and the Law Guardian to serve and file their respective briefs by a date certain is denied as academic in light of the scheduling order of this court dated March 2, 2004, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a).
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9171
S/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2001-00651 In the Matter of Besthani M. (Anonymous). Child Welfare Administration, Kings County, petitioner-respondent; Pedro M. (Anonymous), appellant; Ana S. (Anonymous), nonparty-respondent. (Docket No. N-08105/98)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Application by Wilfred Marrin, the attorney for the appellant, for leave to withdraw as counsel on an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated December 14, 2000.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in relation or opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted, and Wilfred Marrin is relieved from representing the appellant with respect to the instant appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that on or before April 8, 2004, Wilfred Marrin is directed to serve his client at his last known address by one of the methods specified in CPLR 2103(c), with a copy of this decision and order and shall file proof of such service with the Clerk of this court; and it is further,
ORDERED that no further proceedings shall be taken against the appellant, without leave of the court, until the expiration of 30 days after service upon him of a copy of this decision and order; and it is further,
ORDERED that on or before May 10, 2004, the appellant shall either perfect the appeal, notify this court that he has retained new counsel to perfect the appeal, or move for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel; and it is further,
ORDERED that if the appellant fails to comply with the preceding decretal paragraph the Clerk of this court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9149
M/nal
|
2003-07537 In the Matter of Marianne Mason, respondent, v Steve P. Travis, appellant. (Docket Nos. F-397/03, F-398/03)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Steve P. Travis from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated August 21, 2003. By scheduling order dated February 5, 2004, the appellant was granted an enlargement of time to perfect the appeal 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 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing a brief on the appeal on or before March 3, 2004. The appellant has failed to do so. 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 February 5, 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 April 13, 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
M9164
Y/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-11089 In the Matter of John Meyers, appellant, v Wendy Beiner, respondent. (Docket No. F-00484/99)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
On the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that its decision and order on motion dated March 5, 2004, in the above-entitled matter is amended by deleting the entire second decretal paragraph, and substituting therefor the following decretal paragraph:
"ORDERED that the appellant shall prosecute the appeal in accordance with any scheduling order or orders issued pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a])."
ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, KRAUSMAN and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9218
A/nl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
THOMAS A. ADAMS
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-02785 In the Matter of Diane Molenda, appellant, v Roman Molenda, respondent. (Docket No. F-4134/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Appeal by Diane Molenda from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated February 5, 2003. By order to show cause dated January 8, 2004, 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 September 22, 2003, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a).
Now, on the court's own motion, and no papers having been filed in response to the order to show cause, it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated September 22, 2003 (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]).
RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9158
M/nal
|
2003-08424, 2003-08426 In the Matter of Jo Ann Monticciolo, respondent, v Alfred Saracco, appellant. (Docket No. F-1125-98)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeals by Alfred Saracco from two orders of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated June 9, 2003, and August 22, 2003, respectively. By decision and order on motion of this court dated January 9, 2004, the appellant was granted leave to renew a motion for leave to prosecute the appeals as a poor person on or before February 16, 2004. The appellant has failed to do so. 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 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 13, 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
M9174
J/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2003-08225 In the Matter of Luke Nash, appellant, v Harold Levy, etc., respondent. (Index No. 22065/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
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 16, 2002.
Now, on the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as the order is not appealable as of right (see CPLR 5701[b][1]), and we decline to grant leave to appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that the application is denied as academic.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9196
PJL/nl
|
2003-05268 ORDER ON APPLICATION In the Matter of New York City Transit Authority, appellant, v New York State Public Employment Relations Board, et al., respondents. (Index No. 45830/02)
|
Application by the appellant 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 of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 8, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before March 30, 2004 .
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9192
J/nl
|
2003-08304 In the Matter of Dynise Kondruchuck O'Connor, appellant, v Board of Education of Greenburgh- Graham Union Free School District, respondent. (Index No. 81/03)
| 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 Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered September 3, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 11, 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
M9152
M/nal
|
2003-11324 In the Matter of Gerard Richardson, appellant, v Jocelyn Domingo, respondent. (Docket No. V-5145/01)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Gerard Richardson from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated November 21, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 9, 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 9, 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 April 14, 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
M9133
M/nal
|
2002-07989, 2002-07990 In the Matter of Jeremiah Kwimea T. (Anonymous). Pius XII Youth & Family Services, et al., respondents; Jeremiah T. (Anonymous), Sr., et al., appellants. (Docket No. B-579/00)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Separate appeals by Jeremiah T., Sr., and Patricia P. from an order and findings of fact of the Family Court, Queens County, both dated August 5, 2002. The brief of the appellant Patrica P. was served and filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on August 8, 2003, and the brief of the appellant Jeremiah T., Sr., was served and filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on January 23, 2004. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is
ORDERED that the respondents' respective briefs shall be served and filed on or before April 12, 2004.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9150
M/nal
|
2003-11436 In the Matter of Laurel Whyte, appellant, v Patricia Inniss, respondent. (Docket No. P-03984/03)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Laurel Whyte from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated October 20, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 9, 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 9, 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 April 13, 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
M9177
M/nal
|
2004-00678 In the Matter of Jason Z. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. D-6019-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Jason Z. from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated December 17, 2003. By decision and order on motion of this court dated March 16, 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 appeal:
Hal B. Greenwald, Esq.
35 East Grassy Sprain Road - Suite 507
Yonkers, New York 10710
(914) 793-3700
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 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 March 16, 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 should or should 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
M8581
C/sl
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
|
1998-05734 The People, etc., respondent, v Angel Guzman, appellant. (Ind. No. 97/00638)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to reargue a motion for leave to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County, rendered May 26, 1998, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated January 23, 2004.
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.
PRUDENTI, P.J., ALTMAN, LUCIANO and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9034
F/
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.
|
2004-00075 The People, etc., plaintiff, v Richard Holland, defendant. (Ind. No. 1394-00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the defendant, pursuant to CPL 450.15 and 460.15 for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this court from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County, dated December 8, 2003, which has been referred to me for determination.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is denied.
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN
Associate Justice
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9173
S/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2003-00766 The People, etc., respondent, v Charles Langhorn, appellant. (Ind. No. 202/00)
| DECISION &ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by assigned counsel to be relieved of an assignment to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered December 18, 2002, on the ground that the appellant has abandoned the appeal. By order to show cause dated December 15, 2003, the appellant was directed to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as abandoned and the motion was held in abeyance in the interim.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion, the papers filed in relation thereto, and no papers having been filed in response to the order to show cause, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted and counsel assigned to prosecute the appeal is relieved of the assignment; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion the appeal is dismissed as abandoned (see 22 NYCRR 670.8.[f]; CPL 470.60[1]).
ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9184
E/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2002-11317 The People, etc., respondent, v Johnny Pertillar, appellant. (Ind. No. 02-00751)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County, rendered November 25, 2002, to hold the appeal in abeyance, or alternatively, for leave to withdraw the appeal.
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 hold the appeal in abeyance is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to withdraw the appeal is denied with leave to renew upon papers indicating that the appellant pro se is aware that if he withdraws the appeal he will not be able to reinstate it at some later date.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
Appellant's Address:
02 A 6583
Bare Hill Corr. Fac.
Caller Box 20 - 181 Brand Rd.
Malone, New York 12953
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9032
F/
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.
|
2004-00550 The People, etc., plaintiff, v Julius Smith, defendant. (Ind. No. 3093/96)
| DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the defendant, pursuant to CPL 450.15 and 460.15 for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated November 20, 2003, which has been referred to me for determination.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is denied.
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN
Associate Justice