Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department MOTION DECISIONS FOR MAY 21, 2004

TITLECase Number
Ayers v Wooten2003-08002
Banc of American Auto Finance Corp. v Metro L2004-04047
Cardozo v Mayflower Center, Inc.2003-09838
Cruz v Wyckoff Heights Medical Center2004-04212
Deudon v North Shore University Hospital2004-01813
Dominguez v DiMasi2004-02246
Friedler v Palyompis2003-06753
Gerse v Neyjovich2004-01953
Glick, n/k/a Sheft v Glick2004-03989
Harris v Harris2004-03984
Jonathan D. Siegel Trust v Wallace2003-09231
Lewter v Lewter2003-08903
McCormack v Kamalian2003-10036
Midlantic Commercial Leasing Corp. v Levin2003-08610
Nassau Suffolk Lumber & Supply Corp. v Marnel2004-02345 + 1
Padula v City of Long Beach2004-01670
Perreira v Major Auto Rentals, Inc.2004-00487
Precise Court Reporting, Inc. v Karten2003-00688 + 1
Saint-Jour v Mighten2003-11177
Toscano v Nappi2003-10881
Tragni v Tragni2004-03776
Mtr of B. (Anonymous), Rashawn2004-04167
Mtr of Coleman v Coleman2004-00882
Mtr of Corby v Corby2004-04257
Mtr of D'Alvia; Grievance Committe for the Ni1999-00277
Mtr of Duffy, Deceased2003-10232 + 1
Mtr of Edmondson; Edmondson, a/k/a De Oliveir2003-11175
Mtr of Gaffney v Village of Mamaroneck2003-10558
Mtr of Ish-Shalom v Wittmann2003-02180 + 2
Mtr of Kenreich v West2004-04258
Mtr of L. (Anonymous), Talisha; L., Calo2002-09602
Mtr of Maniscalco v Maniscalco2004-04089
Mtr of Marino v Marino2004-04099
Mtr of P. (Anonymous), Joel2004-04340
Mtr of P. (Anonymous), Vincent2003-10594
Mtr of Seals v Fischer2004-02604
Mtr of Solomon v Zoning Board of Appeals of Vill2003-10324
Mtr of Staples v Smith2004-02047
Peo v Martinez, William2002-07757
Peo v Page, Jermaine B.1998-11448





Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11694

C/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

THOMAS A. ADAMS

BARRY A. COZIER

ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.

2003-08002

Colleen Ayers, respondent, v

Tina Wooten etc., et al., appellants.

(Index No. 12839/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellants to stay all proceedings in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered July 7, 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.

FLORIO, J.P., ADAMS, COZIER and LIFSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11705

R/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

THOMAS A. ADAMS

BARRY A. COZIER

ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.

2004-04047

Banc of America Auto Finance Corp.,

respondent, v Metro Auto Leasing, Inc.,

d/b/a Carsbuytel, et al., defendants, Strictly

Auto Leasing, Inc., et al., appellants.

(Index No. 3497/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellants to stay enforcement of stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated April 26, 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.

FLORIO, J.P., ADAMS, COZIER and LIFSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11702

S/sl

2003-09838

Alan Cardozo, et al., appellants-respondents,

v Mayflower Center, Inc., et al., respondents-

appellants, Lady L. Charters, Inc., respondent.

(Index No. 5743/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the respondent-appellant Abaco Management Corp. pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal and cross appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 21, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the movant's time to serve and file a brief, including its points of argument on its cross appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]), is enlarged until June 3, 2004, and the movant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11698

O/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

THOMAS A. ADAMS

BARRY A. COZIER

ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.

2004-04212

Betsy Cruz, plaintiff, v Wyckoff Heights

Medical Center, et al., defendants.

(Index No. 36074/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the plaintiff, inter alia, for leave to appeal to this court from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 19, 2004, as directed a hearing to aid in the disposition of a motion for summary judgment and held the motion in abeyance in the interim.

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 (see Bagdy v Progresso Foods Corp., 86 AD2d 589); and it is further,

ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied as academic.

FLORIO, J.P., ADAMS, COZIER and LIFSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court



Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11690

C/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

THOMAS A. ADAMS

BARRY A. COZIER

ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.

2004-01813

Elizabeth Deudon, etc., respondent, v

North Shore University Hospital, et al.,

appellants.

(Index No. 25260/97)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant North Shore University Hospital Center for Extended Care to stay the jury selection and trial in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 16, 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.

FLORIO, J.P., ADAMS, COZIER and LIFSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11704

S/sl

2004-02246

Alicia Campis Dominguez, et al., respondents,

v Ronald DiMasi, et al., appellants.

(Index No. 27182/01)

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 February 17, 2004.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before June 1, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11696

J/sl

2003-06753

Samuel Friedler, et al., plaintiffs-respondents,

v Vassiliki Palyompis, defendant, Nasti and

Company, Inc., et al., defendants-respondents,

Coldwell Banker, Inc., appellant.

(Index No. 22821/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the plaintiffs-respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 24, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the plaintiffs-respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until June 1, 2004, and the plaintiffs-respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11740

O/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.

2004-01953

Mark Gerse, etc., et al., respondents, v

Mario Neyjovich, et al., defendants, Thomas

L. Lee, et al., appellants.

(Index No. 22542/02)

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, Kings County, dated January 6, 2004.

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.

ALTMAN, J.P., H. MILLER, GOLDSTEIN and SKELOS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11546

M/nal

2004-03989

Carol Glick, n/k/a Carol Sheft, respondent,

v Russell Glick, appellant.

(Index No. 005888-99)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Russell Glick from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 30, 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.




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11544

M/nal

2004-03984

Eli Harris, respondent,

v Lisa Baron Harris, appellant.

(Index No. 201333/01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Lisa Baron Harris from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 31, 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.




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11741

S/sl

2003-09231

Jonathan D. Siegel Trust, respondent,

v Mike Wallace, defendant, Beatrice

Baldi, appellant.

(Index No. 15011/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated September 18, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until May 26, 2004, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11700

J/sl

2003-08903

Eddie M. Lewter, respondent,

v Leilani Russell Lewter, appellant.

(Index No. 6347/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated August 12, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until August 6, 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 of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11706

R/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

THOMAS A. ADAMS

BARRY A. COZIER

ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.

2003-10036

Andrew McCormack, plaintiff-respondent,

v Michael Kamalian, etc., et al., defendants-

respondents; Dupée, Dupée & Monroe, P.C.,

nonparty-appellant.

(Index No. 6517/98)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay all proceedings in the above-entitled action, including the trial, pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated May 17, 2004, and for a preference in the calendaring of the appeal.

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

ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the notice of appeal from the decision dated October 1, 2003, is deemed to be a premature notice of appeal from the order dated May 17, 2004 (see CPLR 5520 [c]); and it is further,

ORDERED that on or before June 1, 2004, the appellant shall serve and file a supplemental record on appeal that contains the order dated May 17, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to stay all proceedings in the above-entitled action is granted and all proceedings in the above-entitled action, including the trial, are stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal; and it is further,

ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied.

FLORIO, J.P., ADAMS, COZIER and LIFSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11689

J/sl

2003-08610

Midlantic Commercial Leasing Corp., respondent,

v Isaac Levin, appellant, et al., defendants.

(Index No. 4034/88)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 12, 2002.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until June 14, 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 of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11693

CF/

2004-02345, 2004-02346

Nassau Suffolk Lumber & Supply Corp.,

respondent, v Marnell Building &

Development, et al., defendants, Paul Marnell,

et al., appellants.

(Index No. 26969/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION
Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellants to withdraw appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated January 30, 2004, and a judgment of the same court, entered March 3, 2004.

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

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeals marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11737

S/sl

2004-01670

Elizabeth Padula, et al., appellants,

v City of Long Beach, et al., respondents.

(Index No. 13545/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the respondent Walsh Brothers Tree Service, Inc., 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, Nassau County, dated January 29, 2004.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the movant's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until June 21, 2004, and the movant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11692

CF/

2004-00487

Marva Perreira, respondent, v

Major Auto Rentals, Inc., et al., appellants.

(Index No. 28155/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION
Application to Withdraw Appeal

Separate applications by the appellants to withdraw their respective appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 10, 2003.

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

ORDERED that the applications are granted and the appeals are marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11686

S/sl

SONDRA MILLER, J.P.

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

THOMAS A. ADAMS

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-00688, 2003-05569

Precise Court Reporting, Inc., et al., appellants,

v Mark Karten, respondent.

(Action No. 1)

(Index No. 939/00)

Florence E. Seff, etc., et al., appellants, v

Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel, P.C.,

et al., respondents.

(Action No. 2)

(Index No. 9355/00)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeals by the plaintiffs in both actions from two orders of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered December 16, 2002, and dated February 28, 2003, respectively, which were determined by decision and order of this court dated April 5, 2004. The decision and order of this court directed the counsel for the parties to show cause why an order should or should not be made and entered imposing such sanctions and/or costs if any, against the appellants and/or their counsel pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1(c) as this court may deem appropriate.

Now, on the court's own motion and upon the papers filed in support and in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that within 20 days after service of a copy of this decision and order on motion upon it, Ryan & Devereaux & Conlon, counsel for the appellants, shall pay a sanction in the sum of $1000 to the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.1[b]; 130-1.3); and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Westchster County, shall enter judgments accordingly (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.2); and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, shall serve a copy of this decision and order on motion upon counsel for the parties by regular mail; and it is further,

ORDERED that within 10 days after payment of the sanction, Ryan & Devereaux & Conlon shall file proof of such payment with the Clerk of this court.

Pursuant to Uniform Rules for Trial Courts § 130-1.1(a), the court may impose financial sanctions upon a party or an attorney who engages in "frivolous conduct (22 NYCRR 130-1.1[a])." The plaintiffs have advanced arguments that are "completely without merit in law or fact and cannot be supported by a reasonable argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law" and their conduct throughout this litigation appears to have been intended primarily to harass the defendants (22 NYCRR 130-1.1[c][1], [2]). Accordingly, a sanction in the amount indicated is appropriate.

S. MILLER, J.P., LUCIANO, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11697

CF/

2003-11177

Varnel Saint-Jour, respondent, v

Lorrea R. Mighten, et al., appellants.

(Index No. 19510/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION
Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant Lorrea R. Mighten to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 24, 2003.

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

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal by Lorrea R. Mighten is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11701

S/sl

2003-10881

Samuel Toscano, appellant,

v Richard Nappi, et al., respondents.

(Index No. 19067/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 19, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until July 6, 2004, and the respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11539

A/sl

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.

NANCY E. SMITH

STEPHEN G. CRANE

STEVEN W. FISHER, JJ.

2004-03776

Wayne Tragni, et al., respondents, v

Damon S. Tragni, appellant.

(Index No. 4251/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered April 22, 2004, to stay enforcement of the order and to stay all proceedings in the above-entitled action, 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.

SANTUCCI, J.P., SMITH, CRANE and FISHER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11555

M/nal

2004-04167

In the Matter of Rashawn B. (Anonymous),

appellant.

(Docket No. D-01399/04)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Rashawn B. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated March 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 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.




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11366

M/nal

2004-00882

In the Matter of Arthur L. Coleman, appellant,

v Suzanne Coleman, respondent.

(Docket No. F-00070/02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Arthur L. Coleman from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated December 30, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a]) it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order dated February 27, 2004, is amended to provide that appellant's time to comply therewith is enlarged until June 15, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that if the appellant fails to comply with the scheduling order dated February 27, 2004, on or before that date, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11561

M/nal

2004-04257

In the Matter of Joann Corby, appellant,

v Scott M. Corby, respondent.

(Docket No. O-10198-02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Joann Corby 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 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.




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11678

K/cf

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

1999-00277

In the Matter of Robert C. D'Alvia,

a disbarred attorney.

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
FOR REINSTATEMENT

Motion by the respondent, Robert C. D'Alvia, who was admitted to the Bar on February 21, 1973, at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, (1) to vacate the opinion and order of this court dated September 18, 1989, that disbarred him and (2) to reinstate him to the practice of law. By decision and order of this court dated May 19, 1999, his first application to vacate the order of disbarment and reinstate him to the practice of law was denied. By further decision and order of this court dated October 31, 2002, his second application for reinstatement was denied.

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

ORDERED that the motion is withdrawn.

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

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11691

CF/

2003-10232, 2003-10237

In the Matter of Bernard Duffy, deceased.

Jane Moore, respondent; Wallace, Witty,

Frampton & Veltry, P.C., appellant.

(Index No. 756/00)

ORDER ON APPLICATION
Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw appeals from a decree of the Surrogate's Court, Suffolk County, dated September 19, 2003, and a decision of the same court dated August 25, 2003.

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

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeals are marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11695

CF/

2003-11175

In the Matter of Vonetta Edmonson,

petitioner-respondent; Brian Edmonson,

a/k/a Brian De Oliveira, et al., respondents-

respondents; John A. Cahill, appellant.

(Index No. 108253/00)

ORDER ON APPLICATION
Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 21, 2003.

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

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11736

S/sl

2003-10558

In the Matter of James Gaffney, et al., respondents,

v Village of Mamaroneck, etc., et al., appellants.

(Index No. 16421/03)

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, Westchester County, dated October 22, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until June 8, 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




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11727

A/sl

HOWARD MILLER, J.P.

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

ROBERT A. SPOLZINO, JJ.

2003-02180, 2003-02799, 2003-07972

In the Matter of Jehuda Ish-Shalom,

appellant, v Veronica Wittmann, respondent.

(Docket Nos. V-695/97, V-696/97)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant pro se on appeals from two orders of the Family Court, Westchester County, both entered February 6, 2003, and an order of the same court entered July 25, 2003, to stay enforcement of the order entered February 6, 2003, which, inter alia, held that New York lacked jurisdiction over the instant matter, pending hearing and determination of the appeals, and, in effect, for a preference in the calendaring of the appeals, and separate application by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect the appeals.

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

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is, in effect, for a preference is denied with leave to renew upon the perfection of the appeals; and it is further,

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

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

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeals by causing the original papers constituting the record on the appeals to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing his brief on the appeals is enlarged until July 1, 2004.

H. MILLER, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, LUCIANO and SPOLZINO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11558

M/nal

2004-04258

In the Matter of Joseph Kenreich, appellant,

v Dana West, respondent.

(Docket No. P-84-91)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Joseph Kenreich from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated April 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.




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M5750

S/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

BARRY A. COZIER

WILLIAM F. MASTRO

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2002-09602

In the Matter of Talisha L. (Anonymous).

Administration for Children's Services, et al.,

respondents; Erica L. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 1)

In the Matter of Calo L. (Anonymous).

Administration for Children's Services, et al.,

respondents; Erica L. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 2)

(Docket Nos. N-772-00,N-773-00, V-9211-00,

G-5425-02 G-542-6-02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal by Erica L. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 6, 2002. By order to show cause dated September 11, 2003, 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 the scheduling order dated May 16, 2003, 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 motion is denied.

ALTMAN, J.P., COZIER, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court



Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11548

M/nal

2004-04089

In the Matter of Karen Maniscalco, respondent,

v Thomas Maniscalco, appellant.

(Docket No. O-5070-04)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Thomas Maniscalco from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated March 30, 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.




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11550

M/nal

2004-04099

In the Matter of Gigi M. Marino, respondent,

v Thomas D. Marino, appellant.

(Docket No. O-01861-04)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Thomas D. Marino from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated April 7, 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.




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11568

M/nal

2004-04340

In the Matter of Joel P. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Docket No. S-3115-03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Joel P. from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County, dated April 15, 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.




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11684

R/sl

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

SONDRA MILLER

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, JJ.

2003-10594

In the Matter of Vincent P. (Anonymous).

Nassau County Department of Social Services,

respondent; Ina P. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 1)

(Docket No. NN-310-96)

In the Matter of Joshua P. (Anonymous).

Nassau County Department of Social Services,

respondent; Ina P. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 2)

(Docket No. NN-311-96)

In the Matter of Brittany P. (Anonymous).

Nassau County Department of Social Services,

respondent; Ina P. (Anonymous), appellant.

(Proceeding No. 3)

(Docket No. NN-312-96)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by counsel for the appellant to be relieved of an assignment to represent the appellant on an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated October 30, 2003, on the ground that the appellant has abandoned the appeal. By order to show cause dated April 5, 2004, the appellant was directed to show cause why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal as abandoned and the motion by counsel for the appellant was held in abeyance in the interim.

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

ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, on the ground that the appeal has been abandoned; and it is further,

ORDERED that the motion by the counsel for the appellant to be relieved is granted.

SANTUCCI, J.P., ALTMAN, S. MILLER and GOLDSTEIN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11730

E/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

THOMAS A. ADAMS

BARRY A. COZIER

ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.

2004-02604

In the Matter of William Seals, petitioner,

v Brion Fischer, respondent.

(Index No. 9533/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the petitioner in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 which was transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated December 4, 2003, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to dispense with the printing is granted, and the proceeding will be heard on the original papers (including the transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the briefs of the parties, who are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to waive the filing fee is denied as unnecessary (see 22 NYCRR 670.22); and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for the assignment of counsel is denied.

FLORIO, J.P., ADAMS, COZIER and LIFSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court



Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11443

S/sl

HOWARD MILLER, J.P.

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

ROBERT A. SPOLZINO, JJ.

2003-10324

In the Matter of Stanley N. Solomon, appellant,

v Zoning Board of Appeals of Village of Chestnut

Ridge, respondent.

(Index No. 2392/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated September 19, 2003.

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

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until June 25, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

H. MILLER, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, LUCIANO and SPOLZINO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court



Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11602

M/nal

2004-02047

In the Matter of Ralph Staples, appellant,

v Laura Smith, respondent.

(Docket No. F-6557-97)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Ralph Staples from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated February 9, 2004. By decision and order on motion of this court dated May 12, 2004, the appellant's motion to dispense with printing and for assignment of counsel was granted, and the following named attorney was assigned to prosecute the appeal:

Dennis P. Portararo, Esq.

P.O. Box 276

Chester, New York 10918

(845) 469-5580

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 May 12, 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 of the Court

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

M11703

S/sl

2002-07757

The People, etc., respondent,

v William Martinez, appellant.

(Index No. 1802/00)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered July 31, 2002.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until June 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




Go to Top. Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M11729

O/sl

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

1998-11448

The People, etc., respondent,

v Jermaine B. Page, appellant.

(Ind. No. 11448/98)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant for leave to serve and file a supplemental brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered November 9, 1998, and cross motion by the respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief.

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

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

ORDERED that the appellant shall file nine copies of the supplemental brief and serve one copy on the District Attorney on or before June 2, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until June 25, 2004, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

SANTUCCI, J.P., FLORIO, SCHMIDT and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court