Brian M. Hussey, Wantagh, for appellants.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (MacKenzie Fillow of counsel), for respondent.

Appeals from order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered March 17, 2015, which granted defendant's motions for summary judgment dismissing the medical malpractice claims of plaintiffs Shoulars, Ancrum, Kennedy, Sterlin, and Rice, and from order, same court and Justice, entered April 2, 2015, which granted defendant's motions for summary judgment dismissing the civil rights claims of all plaintiffs, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Plaintiffs' failure to comply with the rules of practice of this Court makes meaningful review of the orders appealed from impossible and leaves us no option but to dismiss these consolidated appeals. As far as we can discern from the notices of appeal in plaintiffs' appendix, the appendix should contain 11 orders and two transcripts. However, there are only two orders, as indicated above (see 22 NYCRR 600.10 [c] [2] [i]). Moreover, while the April 2, 2015 order incorporates by reference the transcript of the oral argument on defendants' motions, the complete transcript is not contained in the appendix; the portion of the argument in which the court set forth its rulings is not included. Nor does plaintiffs' appendix contain the pleadings or medical records in connection with defendant's motions, which sought summary dismissal of medical malpractice claims (22 NYCRR 600.10 [c] [2] [ii]; see also CPLR 5528 [a] [5]). Concur—Acosta, J.P., Richter, Andrias, Kahn and Gesmer, JJ.

Cash & Carry Filing Serv., LLC v Perveez

149 AD3d ?

Perveez, Cash & Carry Filing Serv., LLC v

149 AD3d ?

2017 NY Slip Op 03047

Cash & Carry Filing Serv., LLC v Perveez149 AD3d ?

Cash & Carry Filing Serv., LLC v Perveez

[—– NYS3d —–]

[*2]

Cash and Carry Filing Service, LLC, Respondent, v Rehan Perveez et al., Appellants. Lawrence G. Nusbaum, Jr., New Rochelle, for appellants. Newman Law, P.C., Cedarhurst (Evan M. Newman of counsel), for respondent. HEADNOTES Judgments Confession of Judgment Vacatur Judgments Confession of Judgment Duress in Execution of Underlying Agreement Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Manuel J. Mendez, J.), entered on or about November 6, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants' motion to vacate a judgment by confession entered May 1, 2015, or to schedule a plenary hearing to determine whether the underlying agreement leading to the judgment by confession is enforceable, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Defendants may challenge the judgment by confession only by trial in a plenary action, and not by motion (see Scheckter v Ryan, 161 AD2d 344, 345 [1st Dept 1990]). Moreover, defendants lack standing to challenge the affidavit of confession of judgment. An affidavit of confession of judgment pursuant to CPLR 3218 "is intended to protect creditors of a defendant," not the defendant itself (Giryluk v Giryluk, 30 AD2d 22, 25 [1st Dept 1968], affd 23 NY2d 894 [1969]; County Natl. Bank v Vogt, 28 AD2d 793, 794 [3d Dept 1967], affd 21 NY2d 800 [1968]; Regency Club at Wallkill, LLC v Bienish, 95 AD3d 879, 879 [2d Dept 2012]). In any event, the affidavit in this case is sufficient (Giryluk, 30 AD2d at 25). Defendants' assertions of duress in executing the June 10, 2014 agreement leading to the judgment by confession are unavailing. In order to claim duress defendants had to show that plaintiff used a "wrongful threat" to force defendants to enter into the agreement, and defendants failed to make that showing (Madey v Carman, 51 AD3d 985, 987 [2d Dept 2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 708 [2008]; see Foundry Capital Sarl v International Value Advisers, LLC, 96 AD3d 620 [1st Dept 2012]). "Financial pressures, even in the context of unequal bargaining power, do not constitute economic duress" (Grubel v Union Mut. Life Ins. Co., 54 AD2d 686, 686 [2d Dept 1976], lv denied 41 NY2d 807 [1977]; see also Liberty Marble v Elite Stone Setting Corp., 248 AD2d 302, 304 [1st Dept 1998]). We have considered defendants' remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Acosta, J.P., Richter, Andrias, Kahn and Gesmer, JJ.