Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22674
S/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT
THOMAS A. ADAMS
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, JJ.
|
2003-00854, 2003-07480, 2003-08113 ADC Orange, Inc., respondent, v Coyote Acres, Inc., appellant. (Index No. 2458/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
On the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that its decision and order on motion dated August 20, 2003, in the above-entitled case is recalled and vacated, and the following decision and order on motion is substituted therefor:
Motion by the respondent, on appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated December 11, 2002, a judgment of the same court entered March 4, 2003, and an order of the same court, dated August 3, 2003, to dismiss the appeal from the order dated December 11, 2002, for failure to perfect the same in accordance with the rules of this court.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the notice of appeal from the order dated December 11, 2002, is deemed to also be a notice of appeal from the judgment entered March 4, 2003 (see CPLR 5501[c]); and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
H. MILLER, J.P., SCHMIDT, ADAMS and GOLDSTEIN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22696
Y/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
STEPHEN G. CRANE
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2005-02000 Victor Alesi, et al., respondents, v Underforming & Foundation Construction, Inc., appellant. (Index No. 20743/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to stay the trial of the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated December 14, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted and the trial of the above-entitled action is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal on condition that the appeal is perfected on or before April 15, 2005; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the appeal is not perfected on or before April 15, 2005, the court, on its own motion, may vacate the stay, or the respondents may move to vacate the stay, on three days notice.
FLORIO, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, CRANE and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22691
J/sl
|
2004-05088, 2004-08303 Mary Anne Cestaro, appellant, v Mun Yuen Roger Chin, et al., respondents, et al., defendant. (Index No. 22403/01)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the respondent Citibank, N.A. pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated April 14, 2004, and a judgment of the same court dated June 7, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the movant's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 6, 2005, and the movant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22720
O/sl
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, J.P.
BARRY A. COZIER
STEPHEN G. CRANE
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO, JJ.
|
2004-03479 Denise Cicione, et al., appellants, v Bruce Meyer, et al., respondents. (Index No. 8768/99)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants, inter alia, to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 5, 2004, or for leave to perfect the appeal without a certain trial exhibit.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until April 15, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to perfect the appeal without the subject exhibit is denied with leave to renew if the exhibit is not located or with leave to move for a reconstruction hearing; and it is further;
ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied as academic.
SCHMIDT, J.P., COZIER, CRANE and SPOLZINO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22685
J/sl
|
2004-07927
Ricardo Corriea, plaintiff-respondent, v Linkbelt Construction Equipment Company, appellant-respondent, J.F. Lomma Inc., a/k/a J.F. Lomma Co., defendant-respondent, New York. Crane & Equipment Corp., respondent-appellant (and a third-party action). (Index Nos. 29084/00, 75722/01)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant-respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 13, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant-respondent's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until April 13, 2005, and the joint record or joint appendix on appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][1]) and the appellant-respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent-appellant shall serve and file its answering brief, including its points of argument on the cross appeal, in accordance with the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]).
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22678
J/sl
|
2004-05154 Claudio Cuevas, appellant, v Alexander's, Inc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 1556/01)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 5, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 18, 2005, and the respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22721
O/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
FRED T. SANTUCCI
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2005-00753 Baldwin Douglas, appellant, v Aloma Douglas, respondent; Jocelyn Douglas, nonparty. (Index No. 29622/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by nonparty, Jocelyn Douglas for leave to intervene on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 27, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
ADAMS, J.P., SANTUCCI, GOLDSTEIN and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22724
S/sl
|
2004-04153
Rhoda Friedman, appellant, v City of New York, respondent. (Index No. 226/03)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 10, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until March 28, 2005, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22718
PL/sl
|
2004-01159, 2004-08772 Ariel Ismailov, et al., respondents, v Floyd S. Walker, appellant. (Index No. 31538/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated November 28, 2003, and a judgment of the same court dated December 16, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 11, 2005, and the respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22648
Y/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2004-10656 Wanna Lamacchia, appellant, v Shirley Floyd, et al., respondents. (Index No. 5734/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion to Dismiss Appeal |
Motion by the respondents to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated September 30, 2004, on the grounds that it was not timely taken and no appeal lies from an order which denies a motion for reargument.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to dismiss the appeal on the ground that it was not timely taken is granted and the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied as academic.
FLORIO, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22722
S/sl
|
2004-07229
Wesley Anthony Levin, appellant, v State of New York, respondent. (Claim No. 102589)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims, dated January 14, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until April 14, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22646
Y/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
FRED T. SANTUCCI
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2004-11281 Kened Mrijaj, appellant, v Michael Nicolau, d/b/a Protek Construction, Inc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 15843/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion to Dismiss Appeal |
Motion by the respondents to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered February 6, 2004, on the ground that it was not timely taken.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see CPLR 5513).
ADAMS, J.P., SANTUCCI, GOLDSTEIN and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22395
A/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2004-02563 Sherry Occhino, appellant, v Gerald T. Black, respondent. (Index No. 4449/98)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, entered February 17, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until April 25, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal 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.
ADAMS, J.P., KRAUSMAN, RIVERA and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22682
J/sl
|
2004-05126
Frieda Pinchas, respondent, v Rafael Pinchas, appellant. (Index No. 2088/01)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 10, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 7, 2005, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22698
S/sl
|
2005-00292
Torianne Thompson, respondent, v Steuben Realty Corp., et al., appellants.
(Index No. 33754/03)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 3, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before March 18, 2005.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22641
Y/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
STEPHEN G. CRANE
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2002-09268 Arlene Turini, etc., respondent, v County of Suffolk, et al., appellants. (Index No. 19510/98)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered September 5, 2002, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated June 1, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
FLORIO, J.P., S. MILLER, CRANE and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22530
A/sl
BARRY A. COZIER, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.
|
2004-04986 Paola Vasquez, etc., respondent, v Robert J. Wood, defendant, Queensboro Toyota, Inc., appellant.
(Index No. 1547/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
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, Queens County, dated April 26, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted and the trial in the above-entitled action is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal.
COZIER, J.P., S. MILLER, MASTRO and SKELOS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22716
PL/sl
|
2004-06528 Joseph Vingo, respondent, v Saranne Rosner, et al., appellants. (Index No. 47535/98)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 28, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 28, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22644
Y/sl
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2003-07056 Anthony Viola, et al., appellants, v City of New York, et al., defendants, Broadway Cardiopulmonary, P.C., et al., respondents. (Index No. 5199/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from a decision and order of this court, dated December 13, 2004, which determined an appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated June 30, 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.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, RIVERA and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22494
M/nal
|
2005-01937 In the Matter of Miguel Matos-Robert B. (Anonymous). Graham-Windham, Inc., respondent; Monique B. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. B-16006-01)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Monique B. from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated February 15, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22498
M/nal
|
2005-02024 In the Matter of Victoria Lutz, respondent, v Bruce Goldstone, appellant. (Docket No. F-00115-00)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Bruce Goldstone from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated January 6, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes in the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22695
A/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2004-04735 In the Matter of Merscorp, Inc., et al., appellants- respondents, v Edward P. Romaine, etc., et al., respondents-appellants. (Index No. 9688/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by counsel for the amicus curiae South Brooklyn Legal Services to admit pro hac vice Daniel P. Lindsey, an attorney in good standing in the State of Illinois, and April Carrie Charney, an attorney in good standing in the State of Florida, to represent the amici curiae on an appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 12, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motions and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted, and Daniel P. Lindsey and April Carrie Charney are admitted pro hac vice to represent amici curiae on the appeal and the cross appeal.
ADAMS, J.P., KRAUSMAN, RIVERA and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22496
M/nal
|
2005-01991 In the Matter of Stephen R. Penn, appellant, v Ingrid Penn, respondent. (Docket No. F-05067-02)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Stephen R. Penn from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated February 17, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22706
C/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
STEPHEN G. CRANE
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2005-01866 In the Matter of Thierry Pochat, petitioner, v Patricia Risano, respondent. (Docket No. V-15253/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
.
Motion by the petitioner, inter alia, for leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated February 14, 2005, and to stay the hearing scheduled for March 15, 2005.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to appeal is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied as academic.
FLORIO, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, CRANE and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22495
M/nal
|
2005-01966 In the Matter of Nelson Rodriguez, appellant, v Zamarra Rodriguez, respondent. (Docket No. V-16328-04)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Nelson Rodriguez from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated December 20, 2004. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22499
M/nal
|
2005-02077 In the Matter of Peter Schreurs, respondent, v Adris Johnson, appellant. (Docket No. V-08209/03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Adris Johnson from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated February 10, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22715
C/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
DAVID S. RITTER
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2004-08309 The People, etc., respondent, v Michael Acevedo, appellant. (Appeal No. 1) 2004-08310 The People, etc., respondent, v Jason Bullock, appellant. (Appeal No. 2) (Ind. No. 2895/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants on appeals from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both rendered September 13, 2004, inter alia, to enlarge the time to perfect their respective appeals, and to continue the stay of execution of said judgments pending determination of the appeals to this court.
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 branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to perfect the appeals is denied as premature (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[f]); and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied.
H. MILLER, J.P., RITTER, KRAUSMAN and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22607
R/sl
SONDRA MILLER, J.P.
FRED T. SANTUCCI
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2002-06972 The People, etc., respondent, v Ali Bessaha, appellant. (Ind. No. 580/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Renewed motion by the appellant on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered June 26, 2002, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in response thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied, with leave to renew upon (1) proof that the appellant submitted an application in an action pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, entitled United States of America v Real Property and Premises Located at 43-20, 43-22, 43-24 and 43-28 40th Street, Sunnyside, New York, under Index No. CV-03-6005, to release funds for this appeal, and (2) appellant's affidavit setting forth the amount and source of counsel fees paid to retained counsel in the federal action.
S. MILLER, J.P., SANTUCCI, GOLDSTEIN and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22690
A/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
FRED T. SANTUCCI
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2003-05989 The People, etc., respondent, v Fernando Coleman, appellant. (Ind. No. 119/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion to Dismiss Appeal |
Motion by the respondent to dismiss as abandoned an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered June 5, 2003.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers submitted in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied, with leave to renew, unless on or before May 16, 2005, the appellant either perfects his appeal, moves to enlarge the time to perfect his appeal, or moves for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel.
ADAMS, J.P., SANTUCCI, GOLDSTEIN and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22692
A/sl
BARRY A. COZIER, J.P.
DAVID S. RITTER
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2005-00596 The People, etc., respondent, v Bartolo Diaz, appellant. (Ind. No. 1511/94)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by Chantel Diaz, the appellant's daughter, on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered December 14, 2004, for leave to the appellant to prosecute the appeal 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 by the appellant pro se (see Whitehead v Town House Equities, 8 AD3d 369).
COZIER, J.P., RITTER, SPOLZINO and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22723
O/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
FRED T. SANTUCCI
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2004-01594 The People, etc., respondent, v Dwight Jackson, appellant. (Ind. No. 1830/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered February 11, 2004.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal by causing the original papers constituting the record on the appeal to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing his brief on the appeal is enlarged until May 16, 2005.
ADAMS, J.P., SANTUCCI, GOLDSTEIN and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22694
A/sl
BARRY A. COZIER, J.P.
DAVID S. RITTER
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2003-07437 The People, etc., respondent, v Richard Morgan, appellant. (Ind. No. 02-00368)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion by Counsel to be Relieved |
Motion by assigned counsel to be relieved of an assignment to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County, rendered August 12, 2003, and for the assignment of new counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied without prejudice to the appellant pro se moving for leave to serve and file a supplemental brief upon perfection of the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions.
COZIER, J.P., RITTER, SPOLZINO and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M22664
Y/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
REINALDO E. RIVERA
STEVEN W. FISHER, JJ.
|
2004-04662 The People, etc., respondent, v Frederick Terry, appellant. (Ind. No. 02-00390)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by assigned counsel to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County, rendered March 25, 2004, upon the death of appellant on July 7, 2004. Cross motion by the respondent to recall and vacate a decision and order of this court dated October 21, 2004, granting a prior motion for an extension of time to take an appeal.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and cross motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the cross motion is granted, the decision and order dated October 21, 2004, is recalled and vacated, and the prior motion for an extension of time to take an appeal is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is denied as academic; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the matter is remitted to the County Court, Orange County, for entry of an order vacating the judgment and dismissing the indictment pursuant to People v Mintz (see 20 NY2d 770).
FLORIO, J.P., KRAUSMAN, RIVERA and FISHER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court