APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9654
S/sl
|
2003-03456, 2003-08980 ORDER ON APPLICATION Valerie Alcena, etc., appellant, v Empire Blue Cross & Blue Shield, etc., et al., respondents.
(Index No. 12578/00)
|
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 two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated March 21, 2003, and September 5, 2003, respectively.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief which was submitted to the Clerk of this court on March 26, 2004, is accepted for filing.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9544
PL/sl
|
2003-07036 Baron Associates, P.C., appellant, v RSKCO, et al., respondents. (Index No. 48011/01)
| 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 11, 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 filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until June 16, 2004, and the respondents' briefs must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9664
PL/sl
|
2003-08152 Harriet Beizer, appellant, v Lee Schwartz, etc., respondent. (Index No. 28430/97)
| 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 a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered August 27, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until May 3, 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
M9627
E/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
THOMAS A. ADAMS
SANDRA L. TOWNES
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2002-09904, 2003-00271 County of Nassau, respondent, v Robert Spinelli, appellant. (Index No. 10578/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant (1) 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 - May 2003 Calendar", dated June 3, 2003, as dismissed an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated September 9, 2002, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(e) for failure to timely perfect the same, (2) 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 - January 2004 Calendar", dated February 6, 2004, as dismissed an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated December 13, 2002, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(e) for failure to timely perfect the same, (3) to reinstate the appeals, (4) to enlarge the time to perfect the appeals, and (5) to stay the sale of the appellant's motorcycle pending hearing and determination of 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 granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that so much of the decision and order on motion of this court dated June 3, 2003, as dismissed the appeal from the order dated September 9, 2002, and so much of the decision and order on motion of this court dated February 6, 2004, as dismissed the appeal from the order dated December 13, 2002, are recalled and vacated; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until April 30, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeals and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that no further enlargements of time shall be granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the sale of the appellant's motorcycle is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal.
H. MILLER, J.P., ADAMS, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9204
S/sl
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
ANITA R. FLORIO
HOWARD MILLER
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-04819
Cynthia Dimond, respondent, v Olivia Verdon, et al., appellants. (Index No. 9937/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated April 22, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and upon the stipulation of the parties, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied as academic in light of the determination of the appeal (see Dimond v Verdon, ______ AD3d ______ [2d Dept., March 29, 2004]).
PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9625
A/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
THOMAS A. ADAMS
SANDRA L. TOWNES
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2003-06612 Frances Dobin, etc., et al., plaintiffs-respondents, v Town of Islip, et al., appellants-respondents, et al., defendants; Resource Recovery Systems of Nebraska, Inc., defendant third-party plaintiff appellant-respondent; Royer Industries, Inc., third-party defendant respondent- appellant, et al., third-party defendants. (Index No. 26755/93)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the plaintiffs-respondents to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on appeals and a cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated June 17, 2003.
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 it is further,
ORDERED that the time of the plaintiffs-respondents to serve and file a brief is enlarged until May 17, 2004, and the brief of the plaintiffs-respondents must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that no further enlargements of time shall be granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellants-respondents shall serve and file their respective reply briefs on or before June 16, 2004.
H. MILLER, J.P., ADAMS, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9662
PL/sl
|
2003-08576 Gina Fortunato, respondent, v Alan Zigman, appellant. (Index No. 203278/01)
| 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, Nassau County, dated July 29, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 28, 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
M9695
C/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
THOMAS A. ADAMS
SANDRA L. TOWNES
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2004-00488, 2004-00919 Jesse Gyuro, respondent, v Time Warner Cable of NYC, appellant. (Index No. 36133/98)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to stay the trial in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 5, 2003, and October 2, 3003, respectively.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
H. MILLER, J.P., ADAMS, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9677
R/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2004-00449
Kathleen Hanley, etc., plaintiff-respondent, v Johanna L. Swift, et al., appellants, Village of Suffern, New York, defendant- respondent. (Index No. 7709/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion To Dismiss Appeal |
Motion by the plaintiff-respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated December 2, 2003, on the ground that the appeal was not timely taken.
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., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9484
C/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
STEPHEN G. CRANE
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2004-02003 Vasiliki Roussis, respondent, v George Roussis, et al., appellants. (Index No. 11341/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants to stay an inquest on damages in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated February 9, 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 inquest on damages is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal on condition that the appeal is perfected on or before April 30, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that if the appeal is not perfected on or before April 30, 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., S. MILLER, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9680
R/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-01976 Therese St. Dic, respondent-appellant, v Brooklyn Hospital Center, appellant- respondent.
(Index No. 5632/98)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent-appellant to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 31, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent-appellant's time to serve and file an answering brief, including her points of argument on the cross appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]), is enlarged until April 30, 2004, and the respondent-appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9666
PL/sl
|
2003-08193 Maureen Tuccillo, respondent, v Roy S. Tuccillo, appellant. (Index No. 201015/03)
| 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, Nassau County, dated August 4, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 29, 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
M9608
A/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
ANITA R. FLORIO
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2003-07473 Nancy Uzo, respondent, v Uzo, appellant. (Index No. 12381/97)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated July 25, 2003, as a poor person, for free transcripts, 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 branch of the motion which is for leave to prosecute the appeal on the original papers is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appeal 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 branches of the motion which are for free transcripts, to waive the filing fee, and for the assignment of counsel are denied.
ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9620
M/nal
|
2004-02463 Howard L. Wexler, respondent, v Barbara E. Wexler, appellant. (Index No. 505/01)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Barbara E. Wexler from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 19, 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
M9660
M/nal
|
2003-10981 In the Matter of Catherine A.-Y. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Kenneth Y. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Anthony A.-Y. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Kenneth Y. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Alexander A.-Y. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Kenneth Y. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3) In the Matter of Elizabeth A.-Y. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Kenneth Y. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 4) (Docket Nos. N-363-03, N-364-03, N-365-03, N-366-03)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by Kenneth Y. from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated November 12, 2003. By scheduling order dated January 6, 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 proceedings 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 6, 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
M9669
M/nal
|
2004-02535 In the Matter of Deborah Abatelli, respondent, v Matthew Dienna, appellant. (Docket No. F-16551-02)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Matthew Dienna from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated February 11, 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9658
M/nal
|
2004-00077 In the Matter of Dominick Aloi, appellant, v Clare Aloi, respondent. (Docket No. O-01245/01)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Dominick Aloi from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated October 15, 2003. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on March 26, 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
M9596
A/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
HOWARD MILLER
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2003-06837 In the Matter of Fairview Fire Department, appellant, v Greenburgh Uniformed Firefighters Association, Inc., Local 1586, respondent.
(Index No. 9059/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered July 8, 2003, for this court to take judicial notice of certain facts, or, in the alternative, to strike references to those facts in the parties' briefs, and cross application by the respondent for costs on the motion.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion cross application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion 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 cross application is denied without prejudice to the respondent making a formal motion (see CPLR 8022).
RITTER, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, H. MILLER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9609
M/nal
|
2003-11115 In the Matter of LeVonn G. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Cecelia G. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. N-11117/02)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Cecelia G. from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated October 23, 2003. By decision and order on motion of this court dated March 25, 2004, the appellant's motion to dispense with printing and for a free transcript was granted. 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 appellant's 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 appellant's 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 25, 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9661
M/nal
|
2004-02522, 2004-02524 In the Matter of Shondel Jackson, respondent, v Mark DeSouza, appellant. (Docket No. P-06630/00)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeals by Mark DeSouza from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, dated October 20, 2003, and February 16, 2004, respectively. 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 proceedings 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) 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), 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 appeals to show cause why the appeals 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
M9656
S/sl
|
2003-11468 In the Matter of Joseph Anthony Kelly, a/k/a Joseph A. Kelly. Susan E. Kelly, petitioner-respondent; Commack Cemetary, Inc., respondent; Michael Kelly, etc., et al., appellants. (Index No. 4052/03)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the respondent Susan E. Kelly 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, Suffolk County, dated December 15, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and Susan E. Kelly's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 5, 2004, and her brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9679
S/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-06707 In the Matter of Cynthia Knapp, respondent, v Herbert Runyon, appellant. (Docket No. F-3432-96)
| DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][3] to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated June17, 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 appellant's 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 his brief on the appeal is enlarged until April 30, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that no further enlargements of time shall be granted.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9589
A/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2003-06653 In the Matter of Albert Manuel, appellant, v Sonia Felder, respondent. (Docket Nos. V-6797/02, V-8534/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Appeal by Albert Manuel from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated June 20, 2003. By order to show cause dated January 22, 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 decision and order on motion dated December 5, 2003, which granted the appellant leave to renew his motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person on or before December 26, 2003.
Now, on the court's own motion, and the papers 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 decision and order on motion of this court dated December 5, 2003.
FLORIO, J.P., SCHMIDT, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9675
M/nal
|
2004-02544 In the Matter of Lisette Medina, appellant, v Alexander Figueroa, respondent. (Docket Nos. G-04903/03, O-05114/03, V-05259/03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Lisette Medina from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated February 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 proceedings 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 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
M9674
M/nal
|
2004-02545 In the Matter of Brenda Newsome, respondent, v Anthony Hodge, appellant. (Docket No. P-2770/96)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Anthony Hodge from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated March 1, 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9673
M/nal
|
2004-02528 In the Matter of Aminat O. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Child Protective Services, respondent; Larre O. (Anonymous), appellant.
In the Matter of Lola O. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Child Protective Services, respondent; Larre O. (Anonymous), appellant.
(Docket Nos. N-8308-03, N-8309-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Larre O. from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated February 23, 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 proceedings 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 proceedings 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 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
M9657
M/nal
|
2003-08411, 2003-08412 In the Matter of Arial Ana O. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Milagros O. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Docket No. B-15842/00) In the Matter of Cristal Lee O. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Milagros O. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Docket No. B-15841/00)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeals by Milagros O. from two orders of the Family Court, Queens County, both dated September 5, 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 May 28, 2004.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9622
M/nal
|
2004-02453 In the Matter of Maria Rizzuto, f/k/a Maria Landen, respondent-appellant, v Michael Landen, appellant-respondent. (Docket No. F-406-02)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated February 23, 2004. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal and cross appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant-respondent or the respondent-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-respondent 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) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal and/or cross 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 and cross appeal to show cause why the appeal and/or the cross 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
M9614
M/nal
|
2004-01207 In the Matter of Yolanda Stuart, respondent, v Jorge Stuart, appellant. (Docket No. F-739-98)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Jorge Stuart from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated August 5, 2003. By decision and order on motion of this court dated March 24, 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:
Elliot Green, Esq.
26 Court Street - Suite 1215
Brooklyn, New York 11242
(718) 629-3552
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 24, 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9671
M/nal
|
2004-02537 In the Matter of Matthew W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. D-32498-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Matthew W. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated February 25, 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9659
M/nal
|
2004-01824 In the Matter of Michael Zapken, respondent, v Mary Marshall, appellant. (Docket No. V-2749/93)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Mary Marshall, by permission, from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated January 21, 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 proceedings 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 Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9686
F/
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2004-01475
The People, etc., plaintiff, v Paul Alexander, defendant. (Ind. No. 03-00124)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Leave to Serve Late Notice of Appeal, for Poor Person Relief & to Assign Counsel - Appeal from Judgment |
Motion by the defendant pro se pursuant to CPL 460.30 for an extension of time to take an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered October 21, 2003, for leave to prosecute the appeal 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 motion is denied.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO, and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
Appellant's Address:
03 A 5887
Gowanda Corr. Fac.
Box 311 - South Road
Gowanda, New York 14070
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9663
F/
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-09801 The People, etc., respondent, v Gerardo Avella, appellant. (Ind. No. 1367-02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion by Counsel to be Relieved |
Motion by assigned counsel to be relieved of an assignment to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered October 7, 2002. The appellant's motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for assignment of counsel was granted on December 16, 2003, and the following named attorney was assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:
Robert C. Mitchell, Esq.
Legal Aid Society of Suffolk Co. - Appeals Bureau
Post Office Box 1697
Riverhead, New York 11901-3398
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 former assigned counsel is directed to turn over all papers in the action to new counsel herein assigned; and it is further,
ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:
Salvatore Adamo, Esq.
PMB
414 Sunrise Highway
Patchogue, New York 11772
and it is further,
ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned counsel with a copy of the presentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO, and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
Appellant's address:
02 A 5515
Mt. McGregor Corr. Fac.
1000 Mt. McGregor Road
Box 2071
Wilton, New York 12831
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9676
S/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2004-01353, 2004-01354
The People, etc., respondent, v Pedro Fernandez, a/k/a William Matias, appellant. (Ind. Nos. 5027/92, 5075/92)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Motion by the appellant pro se on appeals from two purported judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both rendered January 20, 2004, for leave to prosecute the appeals from the purported judgments as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the appellant is ordered to show cause before this court, why an order should or should not be entered dismissing the appeals from the purported judgments on the ground that no appeals lie from the purported judgments, as the purported judgments are nothing more than proceedings to cause two judgments of the same court both rendered October 18, 1996, to be brought to execution (see People v Crawford, 239 AD2d 515), by filing an affidavit on that issue with the Clerk of this court on or before April 30, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this order to show cause upon the appellant at his last known place of residence or, if he is imprisoned, at the institution in which he is confined, upon the attorney who last appeared for him, and upon the District Attorney, by ordinary mail pursuant to CPL 470.60(2); and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion for poor person relief is held in abeyance in the interim.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9411
F/
HOWARD MILLER, J.
|
2004-01360
The People, etc., plaintiff, v Keith Folk, defendant. (Ind. No. 7495/94)
| 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, Kings County, dated December 23, 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.
HOWARD MILLER
Associate Justice
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9683
R/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-06142
The People, etc., respondent, v Shawn Jeffrey, appellant. (Ind. No. 6989/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to enlarge time to perfect the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered October 23, 2003, and to continue the stay of execution of said judgment which was granted by decision and order on motion of this court dated November 19, 2003.
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 it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's 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 his brief on the appeal is enlarged until July 19, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the stay of execution of the judgment granted by decision and order on motion dated November 19, 2003, is extended pending hearing and determination of the appeal on condition that the appeal is perfected by July 19, 2004, and upon the same bail conditions set forth in the decision and order on motion dated November 19, 2003; and it is further,
ORDERED that this stay shall terminate and be of no further effect as of July 20, 2004, and the defendant shall thereafter surrender to serve the sentence imposed, unless the appeal shall have been brought to argument or submitted to this court, or unless this court shall have extended this order; and it is further,
ORDERED that upon the termination of this stay as provided above, this order shall constitute authorization to any peace officer to arrest and deliver the appellant to the sentencing court to begin the execution of sentence; and it is further,
ORDERED that counsel for the appellant shall serve a copy of this order, by mail, on the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9682
F/
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-08139 The People, etc., respondent, v Daniel Mathison, appellant. (Ind. No. 7564/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion to Dispense With Printing Free Minutes |
Motion by the appellant for leave to dispense with printing on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered September 9, 2003, and for a copy of the typewritten transcripts of the stenographic minutes, without charge.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that that branch of the motion which is for leave to dispense with printing is denied as unnecessary (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][1][viii]); and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is otherwise granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties 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 stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify and file two transcripts of the proceedings, if any, of any pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); retained counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the Trial Court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for retained counsel; and it is further,
ORDERED that, upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide counsel with a copy of the pre-sentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the court and the District Attorney's office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,
ORDERED that retained counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO, and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
Attorney's Address:
Alireza Dilmaghani, Esq.
Furman Law Firm of New York
P.O. Box 1144
Madison Square Station
New York, New York 10159-1144
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9685
F/
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2004-01642 The People, etc., respondent, v Robert Pagan, appellant. (Ind. No. 1534/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered January 30, 2004, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied, with leave to renew upon proper papers, including the appellant's affidavit setting forth if on bail before conviction, the amount and source of the bail money, and if bail was the appellant's own money, what happened to the same after conviction.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9678
S/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-09537 The People, etc., respondent, v Rafael Perez, appellant. (Ind. No. 9771/01)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered September 3, 2003, as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the appellant is ordered to show cause before this court , why an order should or should not be entered dismissing the appeal on the ground that the notice of appeal is untimely (see CPL 460.10[1][a], 460.30), and the appellant has not sought leave to file a late notice of appeal, by filing an affidavit on that issue with the Clerk of this court on or before April 30, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court or his designee is directed to serve a copy of this order to show cause upon the appellant at his last known place of residence or, if he is imprisoned, at the institution in which he is confined, upon the attorney who last appeared for him, and upon the District Attorney, by ordinary mail pursuant to CPL 470.60(2); and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel is held in abeyance in the interim.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9670
F/
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2004-00415
The People, etc., respondent, v Charles F. Raffaele, appellant.
(Ind. No. 02-00900)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Poor Person Relief and to Assign Counsel Appeal from Judgment |
Renewed motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered March 5, 2003, 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 motion is denied, with leave to renew upon the proper papers, including the appellant's affidavit setting forth in greater detail the source of counsel fees paid to retained counsel.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO, and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
Appellant's address:
03 A 1391
Clinton Corr. Fac.
Box 2002
Dannemora, New York 12929
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9668
F/
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2003-03041
The People, etc., respondent, v Ruben Ramos, appellant.
(Ind. No. 1461/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Poor Person Relief and to Assign Counsel Appeal from Judgment |
Renewed motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered March18, 2003, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.
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 it is further,
ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties 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 stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify, and file two transcripts of the proceedings of any pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; and it is further,
ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned counsel with a copy of the presentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the court and the District Attorney's office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,
ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:
Bruce Bekritsky, Esq.
1551 Kellum Place
Mineola, New York 11501
and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his representative access to the record for the purpose of preparing the appeal; such access shall include permission to copy the papers insofar as they pertain to the appellant; and it is further,
ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO, and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
Appellant's address:
03 R 1829
Camp Pharsalia
496 Center Road
South Plymouth, New York 13844
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9655
F/
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
|
2004-01687
The People, etc., respondent, v Vernon Roper, appellant.
(Ind. No. 208/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se pursuant to CPL 460.30 for an extension of time to take an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered July 9, 2003, and for leave to prosecute the appeal 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 which is to extend the time to take the appeal is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's moving papers are deemed to constitute a timely notice of appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for poor person relief is denied, with leave to renew upon proper papers, including the appellant's affidavit setting forth the appellant's full financial situation including all assets, both real and personal, as well as any and all sources of income before conviction, (2) the amount and source of counsel fees paid to retained counsel, and (3) if on bail before conviction, the amount and source of the bail money, and if bail was the appellant's own money, what happened to the same after conviction.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9406
F/
DAVID S. RITTER, J.
|
2003-10761
The People, etc., plaintiff, v Leon Townsend, defendant. (Ind. No. 3222/01)
| 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 October 23, 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.
DAVID S. RITTER
Associate Justice
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
M9552
F/
FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.
|
2004-01089
The People, etc., plaintiff, v Richard Valentin, defendant. (Ind. No. 2262/95)
| 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 January 15, 2004, 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.
FRED T. SANTUCCI
Associate Justice