Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10757
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05269
Samuel Amachee, respondent, v John Ram Mohamed, et al., appellants, et al., defendants. (Index No.35736/99)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated January 2, 2004, the appellants were directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 25, 2003, on or before February 6, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellants failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10725
PL/sl
|
2003-10342 Tyler Bligen, etc., et al., appellants, v Markland Estates, Inc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 27758/96)
| 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, Queens County, dated October 6, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until July 16, 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 of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10720
S/sl
FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN
SONDRA MILLER
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, JJ.
|
2004-00937 Kathryn M. Boone, respondent, v Joel C. Bender, etc., et al., appellants. (Index No. 6792/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
On the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that its decision and order on motion dated April 5, 2004, in the above-entitled case is recalled and vacated and the following decision and order on motion is substituted therefor:
Motion by Curtis & Associates, P.C., counsel for the respondent, for leave to withdraw as counsel on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered January 20, 2004.
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 withdraw as counsel is granted, and Curtis & Associates, P.C., is relieved from representing the respondent with respect to the instant appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that Curtis & Associates, P.C., is directed to serve its client with a copy of this decision and order on motion, by one of the methods specified in CPLR 2103(c), on or before May 7, 2004, and shall file proof of such service with the Clerk of this court; and it is further,
ORDERED that no further proceedings shall be taken against the respondent without leave of the court, until the expiration of 30 days after service upon her of a copy of this decision and order on motion; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent's time to serve and file her brief is enlarged until June 7, 2004, and the respondent's brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.
SANTUCCI, J.P., ALTMAN, S. MILLER and GOLDSTEIN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10744
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-03681
James Carter, appellant, v State of New York, respondent. (Claim No. 104374)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 26, 2003, the appellant was directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Court of Claims, dated April 21, 2003, on or before March 3, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10759
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05773
Valerie Cowen-Gouskos, etc., respondent, v Prem C. Chatpar, etc., appellant. (Index No. 9026/97)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated January 2, 2004, the appellant was directed to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered June 16, 2003, on or before February 24, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10768
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05100, 2003-05101
Federal National Mortgage Association, respondent, v Nadia Youkelsone, et al., appellants. (Index No. 36834/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated February 23, 2004, the appellants were directed to perfect their appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 4, 2003, and a judgment of the same court, dated April 11, 2003, on or before March 1, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeals have not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellants failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeals are dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10673
A/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
THOMAS A. ADAMS
STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
|
2003-11036 Eva Ferro, appellant, v William Ferro, respondent.
(Index No. 26785/99)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to stay enforcement of stated portions of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 27, 2003, pending hearing and determination of an appeal therefrom, and cross application by the respondent to enlarge his time to serve and file opposition to the instant motion.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the cross application and the papers filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion and the cross application are denied.
ALTMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, ADAMS and CRANE, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10721
Y/sl
NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.
HOWARD MILLER
SONDRA MILLER
DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ.
|
2003-10379 Emerito Flores, respondent, v Federated Department Stores, Inc., d/b/a Sterns, appellants (and a third-party action). (Index No. 14050/01)
| 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, dated October 22, 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.
SMITH, J.P., H. MILLER, S. MILLER and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10420
M/nal
|
2004-02935 Domenica Giovinazzo et al., respondents, v Dorothy Giovinazzo, appellant. (Index No. 8695/03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Dorothy Giovinazzo from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated February 13, 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 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 should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10738
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-03658
Greenpoint Bank, respondent, v Unada Jean Baptiste, appellant, et al., defendants. (Index No. 36949/97)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 11, 2003, the appellant was directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 8, 2003, on or before January 26, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M9998
C/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
THOMAS A. ADAMS
SANDRA L. TOWNES
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2003-06308 Patrick O. Ingle, appellant, v Sheung C. Ingle, respondent. (Index No. 5066/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent for leave to defend an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated June 23, 2003, 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; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, 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 June 3, 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that no further enlargements of time shall be granted.
H. MILLER, J.P., ADAMS, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10714
R/sl
NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.
HOWARD MILLER
SONDRA MILLER
DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ.
|
2003-07701 Fernando Jacinto, et al., respondents, v Dormitory Authority of the State of New York, et al., appellants, et al., defendants.
(Index No. 22389/01 )
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants, inter alia, 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 July 1, 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.
SMITH, J.P., H. MILLER, S. MILLER and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10736
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05079
Brenda Jansen, respondent, v Gerard Jansen, appellant. (Index No.28097/99)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 5, 2003, the appellant was directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated April 16, 2003, on or before February 4, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10737
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05296
Nilda Jones, et al., appellants, v New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, et al., respondents. (Index No.27303/97)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 10, 2003, the appellants were directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 1, 2003, on or before February 9, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellants failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10740
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05594
Khona Kab, et al., respondents, v Sheldon Kronegold, etc., appellant. (Index No. 24027/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 22, 2003, the appellant was directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 16, 2003, on or before February 18, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10605
M/nal
|
2004-03465 Asthma Ali Masoud, respondent, v Kamal Ali, appellant. (Index No. 9783-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Kamal Ali from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 8, 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 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 should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10719
PL/sl
|
2003-08269 William Meehan, appellant, v David J. Hodder & Son, Inc., respondent. (Index No. 3241/02)
| 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, Westchester County, dated July 22, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until May 28, 2004, 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 DepartmentM10760
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05898
Jacqueline Morse, et al., appellants, v K/A Mieka, Inc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 0114509/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated January 2, 2004, the appellants were directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 2, 2003, on or before January 30, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellants failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10715
PL/sl
|
2003-06691
Novitt & Sahr, et al., appellants, v Robert Steinberg, et al., respondents. (Index No. 15046/01)
| 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, Queens County, dated June 24, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before May 12, 2004.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10756
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-06179
Michael Parra, etc., et al., appellants, v Liaqat Ali, et al., respondents. (Index No.11390/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 30, 2003, the appellants were directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 23, 2003, on or before March 7, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellants failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10750
BG/S/nl
FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN
SONDRA MILLER
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, JJ.
|
2003-01732 Albert J. Perri, etc., plaintiff-appellant-respondent, v Gilbert Johnson Enterprises, Ltd., defendant third-party plaintiff-respondent-appellant, Thomas Schoonmaker, d/b/a Structural Concepts, defendant third-party plaintiff-respondent; RPM Construction Corp., third-party defendant- respondent-appellant. (Index No. 1611/99)
| ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE |
Appeal by the plaintiff, Albert J. Perri, as Administrator of the Estate, Chattels, and Credits of Stephen J. Perri, deceased, from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County, dated February 7, 2003, and cross appeals by the defendant third-party plaintiff Gilbert Johnson Enterprises, Ltd., and the third-party defendant, RPM Construction Corp., from the same order. The appeal was perfected on May 21, 2003. Petrone & Petrone, P.C., filed a brief on behalf of the third-party defendant-respondent-appellant, RPM Construction Corp., on June 25, 2003.
Now, on the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that Petrone and Petrone, P.C., is directed to show cause why an order should not be made and entered striking the brief it filed on behalf of RPM Construction Corp., disqualifying it from representing RPM Construction Corp. on this appeal, directing the insurance carrier of RPM Construction Corp. to provide RPM Construction Corp., with other counsel, and granting such further relief as this court may deem appropriate, by 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 counsel for all parties to the action on or before May 21, 2004.
The brief filed by Petrone and Petrone, P.C., on behalf of RPM Construction Corp. (hereinafter RPM) asserts that the plaintiff's decedent, acting as principal of RPM, "committed fraud and caused injury, inter alia, to Oriska Insurance Company" in applying for insurance on behalf of RPM and argues that RPM and/or its principal "is responsible for all payments made by the insurer, beyond those required by workers compensation, due to RPM's misconduct or failure to comply with safety regulations." It appears that Petrone and Petrone, P.C., has adopted a position adverse to RPM and in favor of RPM's insurance carrier demonstrating a conflict of interest (see Flushing Sav. Bank v FBS Props., 105 AD2d 829).
The Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve counsel for the respective parties with a copy of this order to show cause by regular mail.
SANTUCCI, J.P., ALTMAN, S. MILLER and GOLDSTEIN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10761
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05860
Linda Quinteros, et al., appellants, v Carlos Fernandez, et al., respondents. (Index No. 14470/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated January 2, 2004, the appellants were directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 8, 2003, on or before February 27, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellants failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10764
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-06869
RKO Properties, Ltd., respondent, v Shaya Boymelgreen, et al., defendants, Thomas J. Huang, et al., appellants. (Index No. 29822/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By so ordered stipulation, the appellants were required to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated June 2, 2003, on or before February 27, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellants failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10767
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-07269
RKO Properties, Ltd., respondent, v Shaya Boymelgreen, et al., defendants, Thomas J. Huang, et al., appellants. (Index No. 29822/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By so ordered stipulation, the appellants were required to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated June 2, 2003, on or before February 27, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellants failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10769
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-06912
Ross Rieman, et al., appellants, v Union Free School District # 14, et al., respondents.
(Index No. 756/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated January 30, 2004, the appellants were directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 7, 2003, on or before March 3, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellants failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10743
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05664
Romella Ruano, appellant, v Village of Great Neck Plaza, respondent. (Index No. 5056/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 23, 2004, the appellant was directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 13, 2003, on or before February 23, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10722
PL/sl
|
2003-09649 Crystal Stevens, respondent, v New York City Transit Authority, et al., appellants. (Index No. 15156/03)
| 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 August 5, 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 of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10741
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05846 Guy Toia, appellant, v Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company, respondent (and a third-party action). (Index No. 554/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 22, 2003, the appellant was directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County, dated April 29, 2003, on or before January 22, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10717
A/sl
NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.
HOWARD MILLER
SONDRA MILLER
DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ.
|
2003-08159
Tasqueen Usman, et al., respondents, v Alexander's Rego Shopping Center, Inc., defendant, Central Parking Systems of New York, Inc., d/b/a Meyers Parking Systems, a/k/a Edison Allright, appellant. (Index No. 16831/01)
| 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 May 27, 2003.
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.
SMITH, J.P., H. MILLER, S. MILLER and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10766
O/sl
NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.
HOWARD MILLER
SONDRA MILLER
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2003-07473 Nancy Uzo, respondent, v Uzo, appellant. (Index No. 12381/97)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se (1) to renew request for leave to prosecute an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated July 25, 2003, as a poor person, for free transcripts, to waive the filing fee, for the assignment of counsel, and (2) to stay 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.
SMITH, J.P., H. MILLER, S. MILLER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10742
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-10045
Ventresca Realty Corp., appellant, v Houlihan Parnes Corp., et al., respondents. (Index No. 8051/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 22, 2003, the appellant was directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered June 12, 2003, on or before February 23, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10753
O/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
THOMAS A. ADAMS
STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
|
2003-06811 Joseph Verboys, et al., respondents, v Lydia Cotz, et al., appellants. (Index No. 5060-01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondents, inter alia, to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated July 22, 2003, on the ground that the record is incomplete, and the brief raises issues relating to two non-appealable orders, or in the alternative, to direct the appellants to serve and file an amended record and a new brief, to enlarge the time to serve and file a respondents' brief, and for an award of an attorney's fee and costs.
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 to direct the appellants to serve and file an amended record is granted to the extent that on or before May 28, 2004, the appellants shall serve and file a supplemental record containing the missing trial transcripts and verdict sheets and that branch of the motion is otherwise denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until June 28, 2004, and the respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied.
ALTMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, ADAMS and CRANE, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10727
J/sl
|
2003-09242
Sharita Wade, etc., et al., appellants, v New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, respondent. (Index No. 29408/97)
| 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, Queens County, dated May 30, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 17, 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 of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10723
PL/sl
|
2003-07789
Wanji Webb, et al., appellants, v State Of New York, respondent. (Claim No. 106819)
| 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 Court of Claims dated July 21, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until May 26, 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 of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10739
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05174
Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota, N.A., etc., respondent, v Marilyn Matheson, appellant. (Index No. 3951/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 18, 2003, the appellant was directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 12, 2003, on or before February 5, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10716
PL/sl
|
2003-06228 Carol Ann Zeppetelli, respondent, v 1372 Broadway, LLC, et al., appellants. (Index No. 18615/98)
| 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, Westchester County dated June 11, 2003.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before May 11, 2004.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10745
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-03377
Mirelle Zion, et al., appellants, v Carlotta Peters, respondent. (Index No.17738/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 26, 2003, the appellants were directed to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 20, 2003, on or before January 23, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10613
M/nal
|
2004-03329 In the Matter of Steven A. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. D-2695-04)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Steven A. from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk 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 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10664
C/sl
FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.
SANDRA L. TOWNES
STEPHEN G. CRANE
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2004-00620 In the Matter of Wagas A. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Najabat A. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Almas A. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Najabat A. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Faisa A. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Najabat A. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3) In the Matter of Maryah A. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Najabat A. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 4) In the Matter of Ikhas A. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Najabat A. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 5) (Docket Nos. N-10152/03, N-10153/03, N-10154/03, N-10155/03, N-10156/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Appeal by Najabat A. from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated November 18, 2003. By order to show cause dated March 30, 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 appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated January 28, 2004, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a).
Now, on the court's own motion, and the papers filed in response to the order to show cause, it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated January 28, 2004 (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5].
SANTUCCI, J.P., TOWNES, CRANE and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10609
M/nal
|
2004-03331 In the Matter of Kiara B. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, petitioner-respondent; Andrea M. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. In the Matter of Justin W. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, petitioner-respondent; Andrea M. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. In the Matter of Michael B. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, petitioner-respondent; Andrea M. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Docket Nos. B-12816-03, B-12817-03, B-12818-03, B-12824-03, B-12826-03, N-188-02, N-189-02, N-190-02)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Andrea M. from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated April 1, 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 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10615
M/nal
|
2004-03376 In the Matter of Olivia Bailey, appellant, v Leando Bailey, respondent. (Docket No. F-04255/02)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Olivia Bailey from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated March 11, 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10747
O/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
THOMAS A. ADAMS
STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
|
2003-09685, 2004-02437 In the Matter of William H. Christian, appellant, vUniform Holdings, LLC., et al., respondents. (Index No. 20048/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to consolidate appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 2, 2003, and January 30, 2004, respectively, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal from the order dated October 2, 2003.
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 to consolidate the appeals is denied as unnecessary as the appeals may be consolidated as of right (see 22 NYCRR 670.7 [c][1]); and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal from the order dated October 2, 2003, is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal from the order dated October 2, 2003, is enlarged until June 28, 2004, and the record or appendix on that appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ALTMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, ADAMS and CRANE, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10493
M/nal
|
2004-02802 In the Matter of Grazyna Czaban, appellant, v Wladyslaw Czaban, respondent. (Docket No. O-02810-00)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Grazyna Czaban from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated February 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
M10626
M/nal
|
2004-03332 In the Matter of Louis de la Parra, appellant, v Diane S. Cazzetta, respondent. (Docket No. F-00774-97)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Louis de la Parra from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated March 4, 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10000
C/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
THOMAS A. ADAMS
SANDRA L. TOWNES
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2003-08962 In the Matter of Patrick O. Ingle, appellant, v Sheung C. Ingle, respondent. (Docket No. O-5820-02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent for leave to defend an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated June 12, 2003, 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 granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that pursuant to Family Court Act § 1120 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel for the respondent to defend the appeal:
Salvatore Adamo, Esq.
PMB 185
414 West Sunrise Highway
Patchoque, NY 11772-2254
(212) 964-7983
and it is further,
ORDERED that counsel in the Family Court is relieved, and is directed to turn over all papers in the action to new counsel herein assigned.
H. MILLER, J.P., ADAMS, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10665
C/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
THOMAS A. ADAMS
STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
|
2004-00635 In the Matter of Paulster Johnson, respondent, v Kay Semple, appellant. (Docket Nos. V-00929/90, V-00930/90)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Appeal by Kay Semple from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated December 18, 2003. By order to show cause dated March 19, 2004, the parties or their attorneys were directed to show cause why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with a scheduling
order dated January 28, 2004, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a).
Now, on the court's own motion, and the papers filed in response to the order to show cause, it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated January 28, 2004 (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]).
ALTMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, ADAMS and CRANE, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10770
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, 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 |
By order of this court dated January 8, 2004, the appellants-respondents and respondent-appellant were directed to perfect an appeal and cross appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 6, 2003, on or before January 26, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal and cross appeal have been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellants-respondents and respondent-appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal and cross appeal are dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial DepartmentM10755
L/
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
DAVID S. RITTER
FRED T. SANTUCCI
ANITA R. FLORIO
NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
|
2003-05813
In the Matter of Kemper Insurance Companies, respondent, v Angel Espinosa, appellant. (Index No.6522/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
By order of this court dated December 29, 2003, the appellant was directed to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated April 30, 2003, on or before February 23, 2004. More than 30 days have elapsed since that date and the appeal has not been perfected. The title of the matter appeared on a dismissal calendar published in the New York Law Journal, and the appellant failed to make an application to cure the default within 10 days after the last date of publication.
Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(h), it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.
PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10620
M/nal
|
2004-03399 In the Matter of Aleksander Keylikhes, respondent, v Elena Kiejliches, a/k/a Helena Kiejliches, appellant. (Docket Nos. V-1005-00, V-1006-00)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Elena Kiejliches, a/k/a Helena Kiejliches from an order of the Family Court, Richmond 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 of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10728
C/sl
NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.
HOWARD MILLER
SONDRA MILLER
DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ.
|
2004-02135 Miriam Leyberman, respondent, v Lev Leyberman, appellant. (Docket No. F-023008-01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent, inter alia, to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated December 29, 2003, on the ground that the appeal was not timely taken, or, for leave to appeal as a poor person relief and the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
SMITH, J.P., H. MILLER, S. MILLER and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10676
M/nal
|
2004-03424 In the Matter of Zakrya M. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent; Vaneshia R. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. N-15563/00)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Vaneshia R. from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated March 19, 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10758
C/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
THOMAS A. ADAMS
SANDRA L. TOWNES
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2002-05347 In the Matter of Deborah Mahoney, appellant, v Peter Hefter, respondent. (Docket No. V-1176-01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent, inter alia, to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated April 9, 2002.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is dismissed, on the ground that the motion papers were not served on the respondent in accordance with the terms of the order to show cause dated April 19, 2004.
H. MILLER, J.P., ADAMS, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10487
M/nal
|
2004-03012 In the Matter of Milton R. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. D-21754/03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Milton R. from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated March 4, 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 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
M10662
C/sl
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
THOMAS A. ADAMS
STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
|
2004-02517 In the Matter of Delanda Robertson, petitioner, v Kenneth Cooper, respondent. (Docket No. V-24027-8/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the petitioner, inter alia, for leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated March 24, 2004, and to stay the enforcement of the order pending the 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 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.
ALTMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, ADAMS and CRANE, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10619
M/nal
|
2004-03377 In the Matter of Melba Rodriguez, appellant, v Craddock Semple, respondent. (Docket No.V-05895/01)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Melba Rodriguez from an order of the Family Court, Queens 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 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10618
M/nal
|
2004-03345 In the Matter of Gerald W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. D-20174-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Gerald W. from an order of the Family Court, Queens 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 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 Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10413
M/nal
|
2004-03015 In the Matter of Khalil W. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Social Services, petitioner-respondent; Suwauney W. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Docket No. N-04342-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Suwauney W. from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated January 27, 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
M10414
M/nal
|
2004-03016 In the Matter of Rakim W. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Social Services, petitioner-respondent; Suwauney W. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. In the Matter of Khalil W. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Social Services, petitioner-respondent; Suwauney W. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Docket Nos. N-02601-03, N-04342-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Suwauney W. from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated March 8, 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 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
M10415
M/nal
|
2004-03017 In the Matter of Rakim W. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Social Services, petitioner-respondent; Suwauney W. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Docket No. N-02601-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Suwauney W. from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated January 27, 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
M10595
L/
SONDRA MILLER, J.
|
2004-02504 The People, etc., plaintiff, Rene Hernandez, defendant. (Ind. No. 10634/97)
| DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the defendant, pursuant to CPL 450.15 and 460.15 for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated January 22, 2004, which has been referred to me for determination.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is denied.
SONDRA MILLER
Associate Justice
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10624
A/sl
FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.
SANDRA L. TOWNES
STEPHEN G. CRANE
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
|
2002-11550
The People, etc., respondent, v Damon Warren, appellant. (Ind. No. 159/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for an Enlargement of Time to File a Supplemental Brief |
Motion by the appellant pro se for an enlargement of time to serve and file a supplemental brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered December 13, 2002.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied as academic, as the appellant's supplemental brief which was submitted to the Clerk of this Court on April 5, 2004, has been accepted for filing.
SANTUCCI, J.P., TOWNES, CRANE and MASTRO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M10710
F/
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, J.
|
2004-02799
The People, etc., plaintiff, v Earl Williams, defendant. (Ind. No. 855/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the defendant, pursuant to CPL 450.15 and 460.15 for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated September 3, 2003, which has been referred to me for determination.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is denied.
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
Associate Justice