Return to New Filings Page


For September 12, 2025 through September 18, 2025, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

CITY OF BUFFALO v HYUNDAI MOTOR AM. INC. (236 AD3d 528):
CTQ-2025-00005 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit order of 6/20/25; certification of question; Torts—Whether manufacturers owe the New York Municipalities a duty to exercise reasonable care in the design, manufacture, and distribution of their vehicles; District Court, Central District of California, granted in part, and denied in part, motion to dismiss the Municipalities' Consolidated Governmental Entities Complaint; United States Court of Appeals reserved decision and certified a question to the Court of Appeals.

CURRID v CITY OF NY (— AD3d —, 2025 NY Slip Op 04702):
APL-2025-00166 2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 8/20/25; affirmance; sua sponte examination of whether the order appealed from finally determines the action and whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved in the order appealed from; Dismissal and Nonsuit—Whether certain defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint was properly granted; whether plaintiff's Free Exercise Clause cause of action was properly dismissed on the ground that the alleged wrongs could be redressed by alternative remedies; whether the trial court improperly converted the motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment without notice to plaintiff; whether plaintiff's cross-motion for leave to amend the complaint was properly denied; Supreme Court, Kings County, granted the motion of defendants City of New York, Fire Department of the City of New York, and New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them and denied plaintiff's cross-motion pursuant to CPLR 3025(b) for leave to amend the complaint; App. Div. affirmed.

PEOPLE BY JAMES v TRUMP (— AD3d —, 2025 NY Slip Op 04756):
APL-2025-00171 1st Dept. App. Div. order of 8/21/25; modification; sua sponte examination of whether the appeals and cross-appeal lie as of right under CPLR 5601(a) or 5601(b)(1); Attorney General—Powers—Whether the judgment was properly affirmed as modified; whether the disgorgement awards were properly vacated; whether the Attorney General had the power to bring this action under Executive Law § 63(12); whether Executive Law § 63(12) is unconstitutional as applied; Supreme Court, New York County, pursuant to an order, same court and Justice, entered September 27, 2023, which, among other things, denied defendants' motion for summary judgment, granted plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on its first cause of action for a violation of Executive Law § 63(12) and granted plaintiff's separate motion for sanctions against defendants' counsel, and a posttrial order, same court and Justice, entered February 16, 2024, which, following a bench trial, found defendants liable under the second, third, fourth, fifth and seventh causes of action for violations of Executive Law § 63(12), predicated on violations of New York's Penal Law, found defendants Allen Weisselberg and Jeffrey McConney liable under the sixth cause of action for a violation of Executive Law § 63(12), predicated on a violation of New York's Penal Law, and awarded disgorgement against defendants Donald J. Trump, the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, The Trump Organization, Inc., Trump Organization LLC, DJT Holdings LLC, DJT Managing Member, Trump Endeavor 12 LLC, 401 North Wabash Venture LLC, Trump Old Post Office LLC, 40 Wall Street LLC, and Seven Springs, jointly and severally, in the amount of $168,040,168, plus prejudgment interest related to interest rate savings, awarded disgorgement against defendants Donald J. Trump, the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, The Trump Organization, Inc., Trump Organization LLC, jointly and severally, in the amount of $126,828,600 plus prejudgment interest related to the sale of a lease, awarded disgorgement against Donald J. Trump, the Donald J. Trump Revokable Trust, The Trump Organization, Inc., Trump Organization LLC, jointly and severally, in the amount of $60,000,000 plus prejudgment interest related to the sale of a license, awarded disgorgement in the amount of $4,013,024 against each defendant Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump related to the sale of a lease, awarded disgorgement in the amount of $1,000,000 against defendant Allen Weisselberg related to an employment separation agreement; App. Div. modified judgment to vacate the disgorgement awards in their entirety and to vacate the sanctions imposed on defendants' counsel, and otherwise affirmed, and dismissed appeals from prior orders as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

REYES v CITY OF NEW YORK (236 AD3d 529):
CTQ-2025-00004 United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit order of 6/18/25; certification of question; Statutes—Whether either N.Y. Civ. Rights Law § 79-p or N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 14-189 afford individuals such as plaintiff Reyes the right to video record law enforcement activities inside public facilities—specifically, inside the publicly accessible lobbies of police stationhouses—notwithstanding a New York City Police Department policy forbidding any video recording inside its facilities; District Court, Southern District of New York, preliminarily enjoined enforcement against plaintiff SeanPaul Reyes of that part of a City Police Department policy forbidding video recording in police facilities under the pain of arrest; United States Court of Appeals reserved decision and certified a question to the Court of Appeals.

VOLOKH v JAMES (236 AD3d 530):
CTQ-2025-00006 United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit order of 8/1/25; certified questions; Statutes—Whether a social media network complies with N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 394-ccc(3)'s requirement to publish a "clear and concise policy . . . which includes how such social media network will respond and address the reports of incidents of hateful conduct on their platform" if its policy does not explicitly reference or address the content encompassed by the statute's definition of "hateful conduct" and does not otherwise address content that encompasses this defined category; whether a social media network complies with N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 394-ccc(2)'s requirement to "provide and maintain a ... mechanism for individual users to report incidents of hateful conduct" if that mechanism does not explicitly reference or address the content encompassed by the statute's definition of "hateful conduct" and does not specifically state that content meeting the statute's definition of "hateful conduct" may be reported using that mechanism; whether N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 394-ccc requires a social media network to provide a direct response to any individual reporting hateful conduct informing them of how the matter is being handled; District Court, Southern District of New York, granted a preliminary injunction in favor of Plaintiffs and enjoined enforcement of New York General Business Law § 394-ccc; United States Court of Appeals reserved decision and certified a questions to the Court of Appeals.

For September 19, 2025 through September 25, 2025, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

CASTELLANOS v NYC ERS (— AD3d —, 2025 NY Slip Op 04723):
APL-2025-00178 2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 8/20/25; reversal; sua sponte examination of whether any jurisdictional basis exists for an appeal as of right; Proceeding Against Body or Officer- -Whether the Board of Trustee's determination adopting the recommendation of the Medical Board was irrational or arbitrary and capricious; Supreme Court, Kings County, in a proceeding under CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Trustees of the New York City Employees' Retirement System, dated January 13, 2022, which denied petitioner's application for disability retirement benefits, granted the amended petition and annulled the determination; App. Div. reversed, denied the amended petition, and dismissed the proceeding.

MATTER OF CHERYL D.U. v EHIGIE E.U. (2025 NY Slip Op 75414[U]):
APL-2025-00163 1st Dept. App. Div. order of 8/28/25; sua sponte examination of whether the order appealed from finally determines the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution and whether any jurisdictional basis exists for an appeal as of right; Motions and Orders--Whether reargument was properly denied; App. Div. denied reargument of a prior order of the same court, dated July 3, 2025.

PEOPLE v EKUKPE (DAVID) (236 AD3d 528):
APL-2025-00167 1st Dept. App. Div. order of 3/18/25; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Wilson, Ch. J., 9/24/25; Crimes--Appeal--Whether, following the enactment of CPL 30.30 (6), appellate review of a statutory speedy trial claim may be waived through an appeal waiver; whether a defendant has a constitutional right that precludes enforcement of an appeal waiver with regard to a statutory speedy trial claim; Supreme Court, Bronx County, convicted defendant, upon his pleas of guilty of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentenced him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 5 years for attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and 2 to 4 years for criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree; App. Div. affirmed.

PEOPLE ex rel. WAGONER v COUNTY OF CATTARAUGUS:
APL-2025-00127 4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/4/25; dismissal; sua sponte examination of whether any jurisdictional basis exists for an appeal as of right; Habeas Corpus--Whether petitioner's application and petition for a writ of habeas corpus was properly dismissed as moot; App. Div. granted financial relief and otherwise dismissed petitioners' application and petition for a writ of habeas corpus as moot.