Return to New Filings Page
For May 9, 2025 through May 15, 2025, the following preliminary appeal statements
were filed:
PEOPLE v BENDER (DONALD) (236 AD3d 1184):
APL-2025-00087
3rd Dept. App. Div. order of 3/20/25; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Clark, J.,
4/30/25; Crimes--Reckless Endangerment--Whether defendant's conviction of
reckless endangerment in the first degree is supported by legally sufficient evidence,
including proof that defendant acted with depraved indifference to human life;
Whether the conviction may be reduced to reckless endangerment in the second
degree and remitted for resentencing as a lesser included crime if there is legally
insufficient evidence to support the first-degree conviction and defendant did not
request the charge; whether the trial court erred by prohibiting defendant from
offering certain psychiatric evidence; County Court, Albany County, upon a jury
verdict, convicted defendant of the crime of reckless endangerment in the first degree;
County Court, Albany County, denied defendant's motion under CPL 440.10 to vacate the
judgment of conviction, without a hearing; App. Div., with one Justice concurring in part
and dissenting in part, affirmed.
PEOPLE v CURRY (EUGENE) (233 AD3d 1487):
APL-2025-00076
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 12/20/24; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Singas, J.,
4/22/25; Crimes--Sentence--Whether in the absence of a written declaration of
delinquency under CPL 410.30, an admission to a violation of probation tolls the
probationary period under Penal Law § 65.15 (2) such that a court has jurisdiction
to revoke the term of probation and resentence a defendant under CPL 410.70 (5)
after the probationary period has elapsed; whether counsel was ineffective for
failing to object to resentencing; County Court, Monroe County, revoked defendant's
sentence of probation and imposed a sentence of incarceration; App. Div. affirmed.
DEWALD v DEWALD (234 AD3d 520):
APL-2025-00089
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 1/14/25; affirmance; sua sponte examination of whether the
order appealed from finally determines the action within the meaning of the Constitution
and whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved in the order appealed
from; Husband and Wife and Other Domestic Relationships--Whether defendant
husband's motion to transfer the determination of the spousal support issue to
Family Court was properly denied; whether any basis exists for disturbing Supreme
Court's award of temporary maintenance; Supreme Court, New York County, granted,
in part, defendant husband's motion for pendente lite spousal maintenance to the extent of
awarding him $750 per month for a 12-month period, retroactive to January 5, 2024;
Supreme Court, New York County, denied defendant husband's motion to transfer the
determination of the spousal support issue to Family Court and ordered him to
discontinue without prejudice his pending Family Court action; App. Div. affirmed both
orders.
GRAYSON v NYS SUPREME COURT:
APL-2025-00090
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 4/16/25; declined to sign order to show cause; sua sponte
examination of whether an appeal lies to this Court from the decision of an individual
Justice of the Appellate Division not to sign a proposed Order to Show Cause; Motions
and Orders--Order to Show Cause; App. Div. declined to sign order to show cause.
KOLLI v KALEIDA HEALTH (229 AD3d 1303):
APL-2025-00085
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 7/26/24; modification; leave to appeal granted by the
Appellate Division, 4/25/25; Insurance--Excess Coverage--Whether the courts below
properly determined that decedent was entitled to coverage under
defendant/third-party plaintiff Kaleida's self-insurance plan; Supreme Court, Niagara
County, in a declaratory judgment action, among other things, granted the motions of
third party defendant and plaintiffs for summary judgment; App. Div. modified the
judgment by denying the motion of third-party defendant, denying in part the motion of
plaintiffs, vacating the declaration with respect to the allocation of the settlement amount,
vacating the sixth decretal paragraph, reinstating the first counterclaim of
defendant/thirdparty plaintiff, reinstating the third-party action, granting in part the
motion of defendant/third-party plaintiff, granting judgment in favor of
defendant/third-party plaintiff by declaring that defendant/third-party plaintiff and
third-party defendant are excess insurers and plaintiff MLMIC Insurance Company is the
primary insurer and that defendant/third-party plaintiff and third-party defendant are
obligated to pay on a pro rata basis the costs of the remaining portion of the settlement
following exhaustion of MLMIC's primary coverage, and as so modified, affirmed.
ONONDAGA COUNTY v SNY (— AD3d —, 2025 NY Slip Op 02818):
APL-2025-00088
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 5/7/25; reversal; Statutes--Whether chapter 741 of the
Laws of 2023, known as the Even Year Election Law, violates the New York
Constitution or the United States Constitution; Supreme Court, Onondaga County,
denied motions to dismiss brought by the State Defendants and Defendant Czarny,
declared that the Even Year Election Law is void as violative of the New York State
Constitution, declared that various county charter, local law, and code provisions
providing for odd year elections (Onondaga, Oneida, Nassau, Rensselaer, Suffolk,
Rockland, Orange, and Dutchess counties) fall within the Savings Clause of Article IX of
the New York State Constitution and are valid notwithstanding the enactment of the Even
Year Election Law, and enjoining defendants State of New York, Governor Hochul,
Commissioner Czarny, and Commissioner Sardo, their agents, and anyone acting on their
behalf, from enforcing or implementing the Even Year Election Law; App. Div. reversed,
granted motions, vacated decretal paragraphs, granted judgment in favor of defendants
State of New York, Kathleen Hochul, in her capacity of Governor of the State of New
York, and Dustin M. Czaryn, in his capacity as Commissioner of Onondaga County
Board of Elections, and declared that chapter 741 of the Laws of 2023 does not violate
the New York Constitution or the United States Constitution.
MATTER OF STORA v BOARD OF ELECTIONS (— AD3d —, 2025 NY Slip Op
02894):
APL-2025-00092
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 5/13/25; affirmance; sua sponte examination of whether
there is any jurisdictional basis for an appeal as of right; Elections--Designating
Petitions; Supreme Court, Kings County, denied Election Law 16-102 petition to validate
designating petition; App. Div. affirmed.
PEOPLE v TYSON (KENNETH) (234 AD3d 1282):
APL-2025-00075
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 1/31/25; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Curran, J.,
4/10/25; Crimes--Right to Speedy Trial--Whether County Court properly granted
defendant's motion to dismiss indictment charging him with aggravated harassment
of an employee by an incarcerated individual on the ground that he was denied his
constitutional right of due process as a result of preindictment delay; County Court,
Erie County, granted defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment; App. Div. affirmed.