SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
MOTION DECISIONS FOR APRIL 20, 2004

TITLECase Number
Bright Beginnings Day Care, Inc. v Driftwood 2003-09985
Cadle Company v Shrage Newhouse, a/k/a Sha2001-08457
Carlino v Slovac Roman Catholic Church of BF 2003-10926
Carlino v Slovac Roman Catholic Church of BF 2003-10926
Galvin v Francis2003-06815 + 1
Gomez v City of New York2002-06114
Goodman v New York City Health & Hospitals 2003-01403
Hart v Tri-State Consumer, Inc.2004-02769 + 1
Hayes v County Bank2003-07270
Hegeman v Bedford2003-01516
Korzh v Fox2003-09644
Laing v Cantor, d/b/a Law Offices of Samuel 2002-08054
Mahopac Opthalmology, P.C. v Tarasevich2003-08760 + 1
Rivas v McDonnell2002-10654
Rosado v Miller2003-09641
Sanchez v City of New York2003-07696
Steinmetz v Collison2003-09642
Mtr of Braun v Lieto2003-05399 + 2
Mtr of D. (Anonymous), Ibrahim2004-03254
Mtr of F. (Anonymous), Kareem2004-01462
Mtr of Gallegos v Administration for Children2004-03132
Mtr of Gittens v Chin-On2004-03253
Mtr of Greene v Holmes2004-03009
Mtr of Lanza, Deceased,2004-02257
Mtr of Monticciolo v Saracco2003-08424 + 1
Mtr of T. (Anonymous), Alexia2004-03041
Peo v Adams, Trini2002-02173
Peo v Henderson, Kenneth2003-04112







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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10392

R/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2003-09985

Bright Beginnings Day Care, Inc., etc.,

appellant, v Driftwood Day Camp, Inc.,

et al., respondents.

(Index No. 13238/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant, on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated October 8, 2003, inter alia, to stay the enforcement of the order, pending hearing and determination of the appeal.

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., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10399

A/sl

SONDRA MILLER, J.P.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2001-08457

Cadle Company, etc., respondent, v Shrage

Newhouse, a/k/a Shraga Newhouse, defendant,

Judith Brach, appellant.

(Index No. 32277/95)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from a decision and order of this court, dated December 23, 2002, which determined an appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 27, 2001.

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

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

S. MILLER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO 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

M10406

J/sl

2003-10926

Joan Carlino, plaintiff-respondent, v

Slovac Roman Catholic Church of BF

Holy Family, defendant third-party plaintiff-

appellant; Builders for the Family and Youth

Diocese of Brooklyn, Inc., third-party

defendant-respondent.

(Index No. 20626/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the third-party defendant-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, Kings County, dated October 28, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the time of the third-party defendant-respondent to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 22, 2004, and that respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10394

R/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2003-10926

Joan Carlino, plaintiff-respondent, v

Slovac Roman Catholic Church of BF

Holy Family, defendant third-party plaintiff-

appellant; Builders for the Family and Youth

Diocese of Brooklyn, Inc., third-party

defendant-respondent.

(Index No. 20626/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay all proceedings, including the trial, in the above-entitled action, pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 28, 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., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10429

O/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2003-06815, 2003-06817

Bernadette Galvin, appellant, v

William N. Francis, respondent.

(Index No. 5594/00)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from an order and a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, both dated May 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 granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until June 7, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeals and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10396

A/sl

NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.

2002-06114

Gerard Gomez, respondent, v City of

New York, et al., appellants.

(Index No. 26109/90)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent pro se for leave to reargue an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered June 12, 2002, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated December 29, 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.

SMITH, J.P., H. MILLER, LUCIANO and TOWNES, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10398

A/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

NANCY E. SMITH

HOWARD MILLER

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2003-01403

David Goodman, appellant, v New York City

Health & Hospitals Corporation, respondent.

(Index No. 44012/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 9, 2003, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated December 15, 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.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SMITH, H. MILLER and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10402

E/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2004-02769, 2004-02772

Dean E. Hart, respondent, v

Tri-State Consumer, Inc., defendant,

Penny Fern Hart, appellant.

(Index No. 13620/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 22, 2004, and March 18, 2004, respectively, to stay enforcement of the order dated March 18, 2004, pending hearing and determination of the appeal.

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., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10387

C/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2003-07270

Patricia Hayes, etc., appellant, v

County Bank, respondent.

(Index No. 2281/00)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by Trial Lawyers for Public Justice, New York Public Interest Research Group, Greater Upstate Law Project/Public Interest Law Office of Rochester, Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project, Consumer Federation of America, and AARP for leave to file an amicus curiae brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated June 4, 2003, and to admit Michael J. Quirk pro hac vice to represent the amicus curiae on the appeal.

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 amicus curiae brief must be served on the parties, and nine copies filed in this court on or before April 29, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that no oral argument by the amicus curiae shall be permitted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the parties, if they be so advised, may file reply briefs to the amicus curiae brief within 10 days after service upon them of the amicus curiae brief; and it is further,

ORDERED that Michael J. Quirk is admitted pro hac vice to represent the amicus curiae on the appeal.

ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10390

A/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.

2003-01516

Veronica Hegeman, appellant, v

Craig Bedford, respondent.

(Index No. 38400/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant pro se, inter alia, for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 9, 2003, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated March 22, 2004, 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.

RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, GOLDSTEIN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10400

PL/sl

2003-09644

Vyacheslav Korzh, et al., appellants,

v Blanch Fox, respondent.

(Index No. 44569/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellants 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 14, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until June 24, 2004, 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




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10381

O/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

NANCY E. SMITH

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2002-08054

Jeffrey Laing, respondent-appellant, v

Samuel Cantor, d/b/a Law Offices of Samuel

Cantor, defendant, Michael A. Coscia,

respondent, Lynne S. Sobel, appellant.

(Index No. 25869/98)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent-appellant for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 9, 2002, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated November 10, 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.

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

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10395

R/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2003-08760, 2003-08977

Mahopac Opthamology, P.C., appellant,

v Sandra Tarasevich, respondent.

(Index No. 12068/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered September 3, 2003, and September 26, 2003, respectively.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

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

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until July 20, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeals and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10393

A/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

ANITA R. FLORIO

STEPHEN G. CRANE

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2002-10654

Pura M. Rivas, appellant, v Alan J. McDonnell,

etc., defendants, Dewey Perone, et al., respondents.

(Index No. 10288/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondents for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 16, 2002, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated 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, with $100 costs.

PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, CRANE 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

M10385

O/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

SANDRA L. TOWNES

BARRY A. COZIER

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2003-09641

Elvis Rosado, plaintiff, v

Andrew Miller, et al., defendants.

(Index No. 10908/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the defendants for leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 3, 2003, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal.

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.

FLORIO, J.P., TOWNES, COZIER 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

M10405

PL/sl

2003-07696

Alba Sanchez, appellant, v City of

New York, et al, respondents.

(Index No. 18993/99)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated July 21, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 24, 2004, 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



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10401

PL/sl

2003-09642

Michael Steinmetz, et al., appellants,

v Parris L. Collison, defendant,

ERLAC, Inc., respondent.

(Index No. 4234/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellants 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 September 12, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until June 23, 2004, 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



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10382

O/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

SANDRA L. TOWNES

BARRY A. COZIER

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

2003-05399, 2003-05400, 2003-05401

In the Matter of Maria Braun respondent,

v Domenick Lieto, appellant.

(Docket No. F-736-02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent to dismiss appeals from three orders of the Family Court, Putnam County, dated February 24, 2003, May 19, 2003, and June 5, 2003, respectively, for failure to timely perfect the same.

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 appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to timely perfect the same in accordance with the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[e]).

FLORIO, J.P., TOWNES, COZIER 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

M10356

M/nal

2004-03254

In the Matter of Ibrahim D. (Anonymous),

appellant.

(Docket No. D-22896/03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Ibrahim D. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated March 3, 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 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

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

M10326

M/nal

2004-01462

In the Matter of Kareem F. (Anonymous),

appellant.

(Docket No. D-2945/03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Kareem F. from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated February 2, 2004. By decision and order on motion of this court dated April 9, 2004, the following named attorney was assigned to prosecute the appeal:

Richard S. Birnbaum, Esq.

200 Mamaroneck Avenue, #504

White Plains, New York 10601

(914) 428-04565

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 either within 60 days after the receipt by the assigned counsel of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the assigned counsel 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 assigned counsel 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 any 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 the order of this court dated April 9, 2004, has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken, 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

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

M10352

M/nal

2004-03132

In the Matter of David Gallegos, appellant,

v Administration for Children's Services, et al.,

respondents.

(Docket No. V-36564-03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by David Gallegos from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated February 25, 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

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

M10353

M/nal

2004-03253

In the Matter of George Gittens, appellant,

v Michele Chin-On, respondent.

(Docket No. V-10179/00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by George Gittens from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated March 9, 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

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

M10341

M/nal

2004-03009

In the Matter of Keith B. Greene, appellant,

v Cindy Holmes, respondent.

(Docket No. F-02012-95)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Keith B. Greene from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated March 10, 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

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

M10391

C/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2004-02257

In the Matter of Joseph Lanza, deceased.

John M. McFaul, respondent; John Pascale,

appellant,

(File No. 259-95)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay the enforcement of a decree of the Surrogate's Court, Queens County, dated January 30, 2004, 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., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10384

O/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

SANDRA L. TOWNES

BARRY A. COZIER

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

2003-08424, 2003-08426

In the Matter of Jo Ann Monticciolo, respondent,

v Alfred Saracco, appellant.

(Docket No. F-1125-98)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeals by Alfred Saracco from two orders of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated June 9, 2003, and August 22, 2003, respectively. By order to show cause dated March 19, 2004, the parties or their attorneys were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeals in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with the decision and order on motion of this court dated January 9, 2004, which denied the appellant's motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person with leave to renew on or before February 16, 2004. The appellant has not renewed that motion.

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 appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with the decision and order on motion dated January 9, 2004 (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]).

FLORIO, J.P., TOWNES, COZIER 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

M10342

M/nal

2004-03041

In the Matter of Alexia T. (Anonymous).

Orange County Department of Social Services, appellant;

John F. (Anonymous), respondent.

In the Matter of Andasha F. (Anonymous).

Orange County Department of Social Services, appellant;

John F. (Anonymous), respondent.

In the Matter of (Boy) F. (Anonymous).

Orange County Department of Social Services, appellant;

John F. (Anonymous), respondent.

In the Matter of Clarisa C. (Anonymous).

Orange County Department of Social Services, appellant;

John F. (Anonymous), respondent.

In the Matter of Danielle W. (Anonymous).

Orange County Department of Social Services, appellant;

John F. (Anonymous), respondent.

In the Matter of John'na F. (Anonymous).

Orange County Department of Social Services, appellant;

John F. (Anonymous), respondent.

In the Matter of Seqoia F. (Anonymous).

Orange County Department of Social Services, appellant;

John F. (Anonymous), respondent.

In the Matter of Tinea F. (Anonymous).

Orange County Department of Social Services, appellant;

John F. (Anonymous), respondent.

(Docket Nos. N-6120-03, N-6121-03, N-6122-03,

N-6129-03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Orange County Department of Social Services from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated March 16, 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 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 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

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

M10397

C/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2002-02173

The People, etc., respondent,

v Trini Adams, appellant.

(Ind. No. 516/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered January 28, 2002.

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 July 6, 2004.

ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M10380

O/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

HOWARD MILLER

THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.

2003-04112

The People, etc., respondent,

v Kenneth Henderson, appellant.

(Ind. No. 02-268)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to serve and file a supplemental brief on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County, rendered April 22, 2003, and to be furnished with a copy of the typewritten transcript of the proceedings, if any.

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 District Attorney shall file the transcript of the proceedings, if any, and the Clerk of this court shall deliver those minutes to the person in charge of the institution wherein the appellant is incarcerated for examination by the appellant; the transcript shall be returned to this court when the appellant files the supplemental brief or informs this court that no supplemental brief will be filed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant shall file nine copies of the supplemental brief and serve one copy on the District Attorney.

Upon delivering the minutes to the institution, the Clerk of this court shall advise the appellant of the date by which the minutes are to be returned and the brief filed.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, H. MILLER and ADAMS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk