SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
MOTION DECISIONS FOR JANUARY 8, 2004

TITLECase Number
Davis v Goodsell2003-08606
Degree Security Systems, Inc. v F.A.B. Land C2003-11016
Dinerman v Dinerman2003-09750
Fernald v Vinci2003-09421
Freedman v Senter2003-10378
Goldberg v Association of University Physicia2003-01425
Gottlieb v Gurrieri2003-10900
Karen, f/k/a Sternberg v Sternberg2003-10682
Linzenberg v Town of Ramapo2003-00890
Nobles v Procut Lawns Landscaping & Contracti2003-03605
Rivera v La Guardia Hospital2003-03286
Savarese v Sacred Hearts & St. Stephen's Chur2002-07725 + 1
Schofield v Westchester Estates, Inc.2003-07956
Sterling v Andrean2003-06812
Mtr of A. (Anonymous), My'Kia; Westchester Co2003-02705
Mtr of Ayala v Ayala2003-11322
Mtr of Campuzano v Munoz2003-06384
Mtr of Cogswell v Spelatis2003-07822
Mtr of D. (Anonymous), Derick Shea; Jewish Ch2003-10994 + 1
Mtr of Doka v Doka2003-11132
Mtr of Dutchess County Department of Social S2003-04572
Mtr of Elayyan v Elayyan2003-04558
Mtr of Fischer-Holland v Walker2003-01739 + 1
Mtr of Foster v Nassau County Department of S2002-05205
Mtr of Greco v Zuidema2003-08680
Mtr of Harrison; Grievance Committee 10th Jud1998-08395
Mtr of J. (Anonymous), Jaiyeola-Akintunde; De2003-02316
Mtr of J. (Anonymous), Jamal; Corporation Cou2003-10374
Mtr of J. (Anonymous), Shakir; Corporation Co2003-03364
Mtr of K. (Anonymous), Joseph2003-01407
Mtr of Knapp v Runyon2003-06707
Mtr of Lane v Lane2003-02724
Mtr of Malfetano v Parker2002-06741 + 1
Mtr of Molenda v Molenda2003-02785
Mtr of N. (Anonymous), Treyvon; Administratio2003-07167
Mtr of Ortiz v Maharaj2003-06290
Mtr of P. (Anonymous), Andre; Corporation Cou2003-10380
Mtr of P. (Anonymous), Brittany; Virginia; De2003-02514 + 1
Mtr of Perna v Perna2003-11205
Mtr of Picot v Barrett2003-06307
Mtr of R. (Anonymous), Ulysseus; Commissioner2003-11442
Mtr of Roman v Roman2001-07589
Mtr of Sewell-Richards v McIntosh2003-07553
Mtr of Shockome v Shockome2003-09942
Mtr of Siegel; Committee on Character & Fitne1991-01789
Mtr of T. (Anonymous), Marquese; Corporation 2003-10377
Mtr of Timson v Timson2003-03831 + 1
Mtr of U. (Anonymous), Kenneth; Dutchess Coun2003-11327 + 1
Mtr of W. (Anonymous), Aminata; Samori; Toure2003-11081
Mtr of W. (Anonymous), "Female", a/k/a Paulet2002-11376 + 2
Mtr of Werbel, Phillip A.; GC Second & Eleven2002-02971







Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6546

C/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

ANITA R. FLORIO

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-08606

Lauren Davis, etc., respondent, v Patricia A.

Goodsell, etc., appellant, et al., defendants

(and a third-party action).

(Index No. 12593/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay all proceedings in the above-entitled action, including the trial, pending the hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered September 12, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is,

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6553

O/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

STEPHEN G. CRANE

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-11016

Degree Security Systems, Inc., appellant,

v F.A.B. Land Corp., respondent.

(Index No. 29739/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay enforcement of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 5, 2003, 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., KRAUSMAN, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6433

M/mv

2003-09750

Richard Dinerman, appellant,

v Karen Dinerman, respondent.

(Index No. 27622/98)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Richard Dinerman from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated September 15, 2003. By scheduling order dated November 25, 2003, 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 Supreme 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 November 25, 2003, 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 January 23, 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




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6542

Y/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

2003-09421

Louann Fernald, appellant, v

Robert K. Vinci, respondent.

(Index No. 5930/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated November 20, 2003, for leave to reargue a motion to stay enforcement of the order, which was determined by decision and order on motion of this court dated December 3, 2003.

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., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and MASTRO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6562

C/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

NANCY E. SMITH

HOWARD MILLER

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

2003-10378

Mark Freedman, et al., respondents, v

Stewart Senter, et al., appellants, et al.,

defendants (and other titles).

(Index No. 34751/97)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellants 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, entered September 29, 2003.

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., SMITH, H. MILLER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6487

A/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

STEPHEN G. CRANE

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-01425

Iris Goldberg, etc., respondent, v Association

of University Physicians, et al., appellants.

(Index No. 20845/94)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellants to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated December 19, 2002.

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 the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 9, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6545

O/sl

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, J.P.

SANDRA L. TOWNES

STEPHEN G. CRANE

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-10900

Howard Gottlieb, respondent, v

James Gurrieri, et al., appellants.

(Index No. 17108/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellants to stay enforcement of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 10, 2003, 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.

SCHMIDT, J.P., TOWNES, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5979

M/mv

2003-10682

Tammy Sternberg Karen, f/k/a Tammy Sternberg,

respondent, v Stuart Sternberg, appellant.

(Index No. 204407/00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Stuart Sternberg from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated October 29, 2003. 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 shall 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6549

E/sl

NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.

STEPHEN G. CRANE

WILLIAM F. MASTRO

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2003-00890

Leon Linzenberg, appellant, v

Town of Ramapo, respondent.

(Index No. 5759/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated December 23, 2002, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated November 3, 2003.

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 $100 costs.

SMITH, J.P., CRANE, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6485

A/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

NANCY E. SMITH

HOWARD MILLER

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

2003-03605

Christopher Nobles, appellant, v Procut Lawns

Landscaping and Contracting, Inc., respondent.

(Index No. 7496/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated April 11, 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 appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 20, 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 on the court's own motion the respondent's time to serve and file a brief on the appeal is enlarged until February 20, 2004, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

RITTER, J.P., SMITH, H. MILLER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6555

A/sl

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, J.P.

SANDRA L. TOWNES

STEPHEN G. CRANE

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-03286

Keron Rivera, et al., respondents-appellants,

v La Guardia Hospital, etc., et al., appellants-

respondents, et al., defendants.

(Index No. 23850/97)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
Motion To Dismiss Appeal

Motion by the respondents-appellants to dismiss appeals by the defendant La Guardia Hospital, k/n/a North Shore University Hospital at Forest Hills and the defendant Valerie E. Williams from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 10, 2003, on the ground that the order was superseded by an order of the same court dated July 23, 2003, or, in the alternative, in effect, for leave to serve and file a supplemental record on appeal to include certain papers submitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County which resulted in the order dated July 23, 2003, and to enlarge their time to serve and file a brief, and separate cross motions by the defendant La Guardia Hospital, k/n/a North Shore University Hospital at Forest Hills and the defendant Valerie E. Williams, inter alia, for leave to serve and file supplemental briefs in the event that the respondents-appellants are given leave to enlarge the record.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the cross motions and the papers filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time of the respondents-appellants to serve and file a brief is granted, the time of the respondents-appellants to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 11, 2004, and the respondents-appellants shall serve and file their answering brief, including their points of argument on the cross appeal, on or before that date (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied; and it is further,

ORDERED that the cross motions are denied as academic.

SCHMIDT, J.P., TOWNES, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6551

E/sl

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

SANDRA L. TOWNES

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2002-07725, 2002-10571

Mercedes Savarese, et al., appellants-respondents,

v Sacred Hearts & St. Stephen's Church, et al.,

respondents, Carmine Artistic Ornamental Iron

Works, respondent-appellant.

(and another title)

(Index No. 35926/99)

DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellants-respondents for leave to reargue appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 13, 2002, and October 7, 2002, respectively, which were determined by decision and order of this court dated October 20, 2003, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the decision and order of this court.

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 $100 costs.

SANTUCCI, J.P., KRAUSMAN, TOWNES and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6486

A/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

STEPHEN G. CRANE

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-07956 DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Jonathan Schofield, etc., et al., respondents,

v Westchester Estates, Inc., appellant.

(Index No. 7058/00)

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 July 31, 2003.

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., KRAUSMAN, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6536

A/sl

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, J.P.

SANDRA L. TOWNES

STEPHEN G. CRANE

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-06812

Christine Sterling, appellant, v Horatio J.

Andrean, Jr., respondent.

(Index No. 6886/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered July 3, 2003, inter alia, for leave to proceed on the original papers, to stay enforcement of the order and a subsequent judgment of the same court, dated August 12, 2003, which was entered upon the order, to deem the notice of appeal from the order to be a premature notice of appeal from the judgment, and to enlarge her time to perfect the appeal.

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 to deem the notice of appeal from the order to be a premature notice of appeal from the judgment is granted (see CPLR 5520[c]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to proceed 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 branch of the motion which is to stay enforcement of the order and the judgment, is granted to the extent that the respondent is enjoined from seeking to enforce the judgment against the appellant's Citibank account pending hearing and determination of the appeal; and it is further,

ORDERED 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 her brief on the appeal is enlarged until March 9, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied.

SCHMIDT, J.P., TOWNES, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6532

M/mv

2003-02705

In the Matter of My'kia A. (Anonymous).

Westchester County Department of Social Services,

respondent; Idrissa S. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Docket No. N-158-02)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Idrissa S. from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated February 25, 2003. By scheduling order dated October 28, 2003, the appellant was directed to perfect the appeal within 60 days of the date thereof. 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 October 28, 2003, 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 January 30, 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




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6383

M/mv

2003-11322

In the Matter of Lexsy Rosario Ayala, respondent,

v Angel Ayala, appellant.

(Docket No. F-6265/02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Angel Ayala from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated November 12, 2003. 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 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) 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 shall 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6398

M/mv

2003-06384

In the Matter of Carlos Campuzano, appellant,

v Maria Del Pilar Chaves Munoz, respondent.

(Docket Nos. V-12046/03,V-13035/01)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Carlos Campuzano from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated July 8, 2003. By scheduling order dated November 21, 2003, 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 November 21, 2003, 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 January 23, 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




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6496

M/mv

2003-07822

In the Matter of Rita A. Cogswell, appellant,

v James E. Spelatis, respondent.

(Docket No. F-00763-01)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Rita A. Cogswell from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated August 18, 2003. By scheduling order dated December 2, 2003, 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 December 2, 2003, 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 January 30, 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




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6334

M/mv

2003-10994, 2003-10995

In the Matter of Derick Shea D. (Anonymous).

Jewish Child Care Association of New York, et al.,

respondents; D'Hana E'Latisha D. (Anonymous),

appellant.

(Proceeding No. 1)

(Docket No. B-22579/00)

In the Matter of Ashlen Shadoe D. (Anonymous).

Jewish Child Care Association of New York, et al.,

respondents; D'Hana E'Latisha D. (Anonymous),

appellant.

(Proceeding No. 2)

(Docket No. B-22580/00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by D'Hana E'Latisha D. from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, both dated November 12, 2003. 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 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 proceeding 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) 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 appeals; 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 appeals to show cause why the appeals 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6323

M/mv

2003-11132

In the Matter of Stephen Doka, appellant,

v Kim Doka, respondent.

(Docket Nos. V-16358/99, V-16359/99)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Stephen Doka from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated October 15, 2003. 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 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) 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 shall 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6397

M/mv

2003-04572

In the Matter of Dutchess County Department

of Social Services, o/b/o Rakim Webb, respondent,

v Suwauney Westney Webb, appellant.

(Docket No. N-642-02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Suwauney Westney Webb from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated April 21, 2003. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on December 23, 2003. 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6572

O/sl

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, J.P.

SANDRA L. TOWNES

STEPHEN G. CRANE

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-04558

In the Matter of Fida Fouad Elayyan, appellant,

v Munzir Elayyan, respondent.

(Docket No.O-23857-02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal by Fida Fouad Elayyan from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 29, 2003. By order to show cause dated December 12, 2003, the appellant and the other parties to this appeal were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding as abandoned.

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 as abandoned, without costs or disbursements.

SCHMIDT, J.P., TOWNES, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6427

M/mv

2003-01739, 2003-01742

In the Matter of Sandra C. Fischer-Holland,

appellant, v Harold B. Walker, respondent.

(Docket No. V-1149/01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by Sandra C. Fischer-Holland from two orders of the Family Court, Rockland County, dated January 14, 2003, and February 4, 2003, respectively. Pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order of this court dated March 12, 2003, in the above-entitled proceeding is amended to provide 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 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing the brief on the appeals is enlarged until January 30, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6405

M/mv

2002-05205

In the Matter of David Foster, petitioner-

respondent, v Nassau County Department of

Social Services, et al., respondents-respondents,

Arkadius Henry, appellant.

(Docket Nos. V-2472-01, V-2473-01, V-2474-01)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Arkadius Henry from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated May 3, 2002. By scheduling order dated November 21, 2003, 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 the brief on the appeal was enlarged until December 19, 2003. 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 November 21, 2003, 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 January 23, 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



Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6403

M/mv

2003-08680

In the Matter of Susan Greco, respondent,

v Kenneth Zuidema, appellant.

(Docket No. F-5012-01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Kenneth Zuidema from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated August 8, 2003. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on December 19, 2003. 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 respondent's brief shall be served and filed.

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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6561

K/cf

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO

NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.

1998-08395

In the Matter of the Application of William

Henry Harrison, Jr., a suspended attorney.

DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION
FOR REINSTATEMENT



, Jr., for reinstatement as an attorney and counselor-at-law. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of

Application by the respondent, William Henry Harrison the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department on March 15, 1976. By opinion and order of this court dated May 14, 2001, he was suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year. By decision and order of this court dated January 9, 2003, his application for reinstatement was held in abeyance, and the matter was referred to the Committee on Character and Fitness for an investigation and report on his current fitness to be an attorney including, but not limited to, the steps taken to close his law office and terminate his practice, his employment as a title insurance salesman, and how he intends to repay the considerable amount of debt he has accumulated.

Upon all the papers filed in connection with this application, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that, effective immediately, the respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law and the Clerk of this court is directed to restore the name of William Henry Harrison, Jr., to the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law.

RITTER, J.P., SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5920

M/mv

2003-02316

In the Matter of Jaiyeola-Akintunde J. (Anonymous).

Department of Social Services, respondent;

James D. J. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 1)

In the Matter of Jahmir Domevlo J. (Anonymous).

Department of Social Services, respondent;

James D. J. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 2)

(Docket Nos. B-00853-02, B-00856-02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by James D. J. from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated December 6, 2002. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on December 23, 2003. 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.



Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6037

M/mv

2003-10374

In the Matter of Jamal J. (Anonymous),

respondent; Corporation Counsel of

City of New York, appellant.

(Docket No. D-22888/03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Presentment Agency from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated October 24, 2003. 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 shall 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6423

M/mv

2003-03364

In the Matter of Shakir J. (Anonymous),

appellant.

(Docket No. D-24606-02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by the juvenile from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated March 19, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order of this court dated December 12, 2003, in the above-entitled proceeding is amended to provide 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 the brief on the appeal is enlarged until January 30, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6557

A/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

SANDRA L. TOWNES

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2003-01407

In the Matter of Joseph K. (Anonymous).

Leeor K. (Anonymous), et al., appellants-

respondents; Marek R. (Anonymous), respondent-

appellant.

(Index No. 26339-I-00)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellants-respondents to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 6, 2003, and cross motion by the respondent-appellant, inter alia, to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appellants-respondents failed to timely perfect the appeal in accordance with the rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[e]) and prior orders of this court, or, to enlarge the time to perfect the cross 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; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 26, 2004, and the joint record or appendix on the appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][1]) 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 branch of the cross motion which is to enlarge the time to perfect the cross appeal is granted and the respondents appellant shall file his answering brief, including his points of argument on the cross appeal, in accordance with the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the cross motion is otherwise denied.

RITTER, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, TOWNES and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6401

M/mv

2003-06707

In the Matter of Cynthia Knapp, respondent,

v Herbert Runyon, appellant.

(Docket No. F-3432-96)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Herbert Runyon from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated June 17, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order of this court dated December 12, 2003, in the above-entitled proceeding is amended to provide 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 the brief on the appeal is enlarged until February 6, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6586

S/sl

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, J.P.

SANDRA L. TOWNES

STEPHEN G. CRANE

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-02724

In the Matter of Don Lane, appellant,

v Margaret Lane, respondent.

(Docket No. F-01804-98)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant for leave to prosecute an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated February 20, 2003, as a poor person, to waive the filing fee, and for the assignment of counsel.

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; and it is further

ORDERED that pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), the scheduling order of this court dated April 9, 2003, in the above-entitled proceeding is amended to provide that the appellant's time to serve and file the brief on the appeal is enlarged until February 11, 2004.

SCHMIDT, J.P., TOWNES, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6400

M/mv

2002-06741, 2002-07868

In the Matter of Vincent Malfetano, respondent,

v Sandra Parker, appellant.

(Docket Nos. O-01520-02, V-2699-02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by Sandra Parker from two orders of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated June 24, 2002, and August 6, 2002, respectively. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on December 23, 2003. 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 appeals, shall be served and filed.

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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6424

M/mv

2003-02785

In the Matter of Diane Molenda, appellant,

v Roman Molenda, respondent.

(Docket No. F-04134-02)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Diane Molenda from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated February 5, 2003. By scheduling order dated September 22, 2003, 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, and it does not appear that the transcripts have been ordered. 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 September 22, 2003, 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 January 30, 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




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6499

M/mv

2003-07167

In the Matter of Treyvon N. (Anonymous).

Administration for Children's Services,

petitioner-respondent; Jean Q. (Anonymous),

appellant; Latisha P. (Anonymous), respondent.

(Docket No. N-1712/02)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Jean Q. from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated June 25, 2003. By scheduling order dated November 25, 2003, 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 November 25, 2003, 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 January 30, 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




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6426

M/mv

2003-06290

In the Matter of Angel Ortiz, respondent,

v Elizabeth Maharaj, appellant.

(Docket No. V-16639-03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Elizabeth Maharaj from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated June 19, 2003. The transcripts in the above-entitled appeal were complete on December 23, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is

ORDERED that on or before February 23, 2004, counsel for the appellant shall perfect the appeal or submit an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to provide copies of the transcripts to all of the other parties to the appeal, including the Law Guardian, if any, when counsel serves the appellant's brief upon those parties; and it is further,

ORDERED that if the appeal has not been perfected or withdrawn on or before February 23, 2004, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal shall 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6012

M/mv

2003-10380

In the Matter of Andre P. (Anonymous),

respondent; Corporation Counsel of

City of New York, appellant.

(Docket No. D-22885/03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Presentment Agency from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated October 24, 2003. 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 shall 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6408

M/mv

2003-02514, 2003-02518

In the Matter of Brittany P. (Anonymous).

Department of Social Services, petitioner-

respondent; Tammy P. (Anonymous), appellant,

et al., respondent.

(Proceeding No. 1)

In the Matter of Virginia P. (Anonymous).

Department of Social Services, petitioner-

respondent; Tammy P. (Anonymous), appellant,

et al., respondent.

(Proceeding No. 2)

(Docket Nos. N-472-01, N-473-01,

N-472-02B, N-473-02B)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by Tammy P. from two orders of the Family Court, Nassau County, both dated February 13, 2003. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on December 18, 2003. 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 appeals, shall be served and filed.

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.



Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6362

M/mv

2003-11205

In the Matter of Manuel D. Perna, appellant,

v Carla Costa Perna, respondent.

(Docket No. F-08702/02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Manuel D. Perna from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated December 3, 2003. 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 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) 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 shall 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6404

M/mv

2003-06307

In the Matter of Dinah Picot, respondent,

v Rovan Barrett, appellant.

(Docket No. V-7143-00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Rovan Barrett from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated May 12, 2003. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on December 22, 2003. 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6386

M/mv

2003-11442

In the Matter of Ulysseus R. (Anonymous).

Commissioner of Social Services, respondent;

Esther R. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Docket No. N-13613/01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Esther R. from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated December 3, 2003. 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 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) 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 shall 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6534

A/sl

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, J.P.

SANDRA L. TOWNES

STEPHEN G. CRANE

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2001-07589

In the Matter of Jean-Joseph Roman,

appellant, v Tamar Roman, respondent.

(Docket Nos. F-87/01, F-264/01, X-1166/01,

X-1167/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent for leave to defend an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, entered July 12, 2001, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.

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 with leave to renew on or before January 26, 2004, upon proper papers including information regarding the source of funds used to pay retained counsel who represented the respondent in the proceedings in the Family Court, Westchester County.

SCHMIDT, J.P., TOWNES, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6425

M/mv

2003-07553

In the Matter of Frederick Sewell-Richards,

appellant, v Judith McIntosh, respondent.

(Docket Nos. V-2071-02, V-2072-02,

V-2073-02)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Frederick Sewell-Richards from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated July 16, 2003. By scheduling order dated September 5, 2003, 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 September 5, 2003, 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 January 30, 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




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6554

M/mv

2003-09942

In the Matter of Yevgenia Shockome, appellant,

v Timothy E. Shockome, respondent.

(Docket Nos. O-5362/02, V-5620/02, V-5621/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal by Yevgenia Shockome from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated October 21, 2003.

ORDERED that its scheduling order in the above-entitled case dated January 5, 2004, is recalled and vacated. The appeal was dismissed by decision and order dated December 26, 2003.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6563

K/cf

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

1991-01789

In the Matter of the Application of Roy Siegel,

a disbarred attorney.

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
FOR REINSTATEMENT

Motion by the respondent, Roy Siegel, for reinstatement as an attorney and counselor-at-law. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on March 29, 1961. By opinion and order of this court dated April 20, 1981, the respondent was disbarred from the practice of law. By order of this court dated June 14, 1991, the respondent's application for reinstatement was denied. By order of this court dated October 28, 1991, the respondent's motion for reargument was denied. His second, third, and fourth applications for reinstatement were denied by this court by orders dated October 11, 1994, February 13, 1997, and April 20 1999, respectively.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

We find that the respondent does not demonstrate the requisite fitness and character to practice law.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN and FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6039

M/mv

2003-10377

In the Matter of Marquese T. (Anonymous),

respondent; Corporation Counsel of

City of New York, appellant.

(Docket No. D-22887/03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Presentment Agency from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated October 24, 2003. 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 shall 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5571

M/mv

2003-03831, 2003-08567

In the Matter of Lawrence Timson, appellant,

v Janice Timson, respondent.

(Docket No. 1124/03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by Lawrence Timson from two orders of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 5, 2003, and June 26, 2003, 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 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 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 appeasl shall 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6385

M/mv

2003-11327, 2003-11329

In the Matter of Kenneth U. (Anonymous),

appellant.

(Docket No. S-02025/03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by the juvenile from two orders of the Family Court, Dutchess County, both dated November 25, 2003. 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 in the Family Court proceeding 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, 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 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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6321

M/mv

2003-11081

In the Matter of Aminata W. (Anonymous).

Westchester County Department of Social Services,

respondent; Michelle W. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 1)

In the Matter of Samori W. (Anonymous).

Westchester County Department of Social Services,

respondent; Michelle W. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 2)

In the Matter of Toure W. (Anonymous).

Westchester County Department of Social Services,

respondent; Michelle W. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 3)

In the Matter of Michelle W. (Anonymous).

Westchester County Department of Social Services,

respondent; Michelle W. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 4)

In the Matter of Valle W. (Anonymous).

Westchester County Department of Social Services,

respondent; Michelle W. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 5)

(Docket Nos .N-0687/01, N-0688/01,N-0689/01

N-0690/01, N-0691/01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Michelle W. from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated January 8, 2003. 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 shall 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.



Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6407

M/mv

2002-11376, 2002-11380, 2002-11381

In the Matter of "Female" W. (Anonymous),

a/k/a Paulette W. (Anonymous).

St. Vincent's Services, Inc., et al., respondents;

Jeanette W. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 1)

(Index No. B4345-01)

In the Matter of Jennifer W. (Anonymous).

St. Vincent's Services, Inc., et al., respondents;

Jeanette W. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 2)

(Index No. B4346-01)

In the Matter of Paul W. (Anonymous).

St. Vincent's Services, Inc., et al., respondents;

Jeanette W. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 3)

(Index No. B4347-01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by the mother Jeanette W. from three orders of the Family Court, Kings County, all dated October 14, 2002. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on December 22, 2003. 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 appeals, shall be served and filed.

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.




Go to Top. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6560

K/cf

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.

2002-02971

In the Matter of Phillip A. Werbel,

a suspended attorney.

Grievance Committee for the Second and

Eleventh Judicial Districts, petitioner;

Phillip A. Werbel, respondent.

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent for leave to reargue the opinion and order of this court dated September 22, 2003, which suspended him from practice for a period of one year, (2) for modification of the discipline imposed, or alternatively, (3) for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on May 7, 1975, under the name Phillip Allen Werbel.

Upon the papers submitted in support of the motion and the papers submitted in response thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied in its entirety.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk