Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29551

S/sl

2005-05309 Azad Anand, appellant, v Jack Wilson, respondent. (Index No. 5745/02)

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 a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 23, 2005.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until September 16, 2005, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29564

S/sl

2005-00246, 2005-05731 Bedford Gardens Company, L.P., appellant-respondent, v Jacob Jacobowitz, et al., respondents-appellants. (Index No. 16649/03)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant-respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 13, 2004, and December 10, 2004.

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

ORDERED that the appellant-respondent's time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until September 15, 2005, and the joint record on appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][1]) and the appellant-respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,

ORDERED that the respondents-appellants shall serve and file their answering brief, including their points of argument on the cross appeal, in accordance with the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]).

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29554

S/sl

2005-00752 Taylor McNally, etc., et al., respondents-appellants, v Peter Corwin, appellant-respondent, Laura Burnside, defendant third-party plaintiff-respondent; Michael McNally, third-party defendant-respondent. (Index No. 9370/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the respondents-appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 11, 2005.

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

ORDERED that the respondents-appellants shall serve and file their answering brief, including their points of argument on the cross appeal, on or before October 20, 2005 (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the respondents shall serve and file their respective briefs on or before November 28, 2005; the appellant-respondent shall serve and file his reply brief on or before January 3, 2006; and the respondents-appellants shall serve and file their reply brief on or before January 18, 2006.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29550

S/sl

2005-02151 Samuel Neuman, appellant, v Zurich North America, a/k/a Zurich American Insurance Company, et al., respondents, et al., defendants. (Index No. 3104/04)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an amended order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 11 2005.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until November 7, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29557

S/sl

2004-08015 Karen Ramos, et al., respondents-appellants, v Nouveau Industries, Inc., appellant-respondent. (Index No. 25420/98)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant-respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal and cross-appeal from a judgement of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered August 25, 2004.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant-respondent's reply brief shall be served and filed on or before September 20, 2005.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29565

S/sl

2004-09865 Julio Rios, et al., respondents-appellants, v City of New York, et al., defendants-respondents, New York City Transit Authority, appellant- respondent. (Index No. 13271/96)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the respondents-appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file their brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated October 6, 2004.

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

ORDERED that the respondents-appellants shall serve and file their answering brief, including their points of argument on the cross appeal, on or before September 13, 2005 (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]).

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29549

S/sl

2005-03141 237 W. 230 Street Realty Corp., plaintiff, v Castle Oil Corporation, et al., respondents, Trans Service Corporation, appellant, et al., defendants. (Index No. 3672/04)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated February 28, 2005.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until November 22, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29553

S/sl

2005-06305 Linda M. Wagner, respondent, v Island Medical Care, P.C., et al., defendants, Kris Subramani, appellant. (Index No. 2399/03)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

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

May 16, 2005.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until October 24, 2005, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29451

E/sl

HOWARD MILLER, J.P.

STEPHEN G. CRANE

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2005-05200 In the Matter of Jason Tavarez, respondent, v Samantha Musse, appellant. (Docket No. V-20414/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the attorney assigned to represent the appellant by the Family Court, Kings County, to be relieved from prosecuting an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated April 29, 2005, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, for the assignment of counsel, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal.

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

ORDERED that the branches of the motion which are to relieve assigned counsel from prosecuting the appeal, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, for the assignment of counsel are granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the briefs of the appellant, the respondent, and the Law Guardian, if any. The parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other (22 NYCRR 670.9[d][1][ii]; Family Ct Act § 1116); and it is further,

 ORDERED that the stenographer(s) and/or the transcription service(s) is/are required promptly to make and certify two transcripts of the proceedings, if any, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (22 NYCRR 671.9); in the case of stenographers, both transcripts shall be filed with the clerk of the Family Court, and the clerk of the Family Court shall furnish one of such certified transcripts to the appellant's counsel, without charge; in the case of transcription services, one transcript shall be filed with the clerk of the Family Court and one transcript shall be delivered to the assigned counsel. Assigned counsel is directed to provide copies of said transcripts to all of the other parties to the appeal, including the Law Guardian, if any, when counsel serves the appellant's brief upon those parties; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to Family Court Act § 1120 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:

Richard Casdinale, Esq.

26 Court Street - Suite 1815

Brooklyn, New York 11242

(718) 624-9391

and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal is referred to the Clerk of this court pursuant to the rules of this court for the issuance of a scheduling order (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a]); and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.

H. MILLER, J.P., CRANE, LUCIANO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29574

S/sl

THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO

ROBERT A. LIFSON

ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.

2003-10400 In the Matter of Town of Cortlandt, petitioner, v New York State Board of Real Property Services, respondent.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Hybrid proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, RPTL article 12, and 9 NYCRR subpart 186-2 et seq. By decision and order on motion dated May 20, 2004, the respondent's motion to dismiss the proceeding was denied, and the respondent was given until June 11, 2004, to file its answer. The respondent has not filed its answer and the petitioner has not perfected the proceeding.

Now, on the court's own motion, it is

ORDERED that the petitioner or its attorney are directed to show cause why the proceeding should not be dismissed as abandoned (see 22 NYCRR 670.18[c]) by filing an affirmation on that issue with the Clerk of this court on or before September 30, 2005; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, shall serve this order to show cause on the parties or their attorneys, by regular mail.

ADAMS, J.P., MASTRO, LIFSON and LUNN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29367

L/

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2005-07209 The People, etc., plaintiff, v Shamel Barrett, defendant. (Ind. No. 3248/01)

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 June 28, 2005, 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.

REINALDO E. RIVERA

Associate Justice

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29524

L/

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

2005-07389 The People, etc., plaintiff, v Michael Canty, a/k/a Shanell James, a/k/a Kevin Patsey, defendant. (Ind. No. 9853/93)

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, Kings County, dated June 22, 2005, 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.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO

Associate Justice

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29533

F/

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

STEVEN W. FISHER, JJ.

2002-03449 The People, etc., respondent, DECISION & ORDER v Kenneth Johnson, appellant. Court's Motion to R (Ind. No. 01-00186)

ON MOTION elieve Counsel And to Assign New Counsel

The appellant's motion to dispense with printing and for assignment of counsel on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County, rendered July 13, 2001, was granted on October 22, 2002. The following named attorney was assigned to prosecute the appeal:

Ethel P. Ross, Esq.

720 Milton Road

Rye, New York 10580

On the court's own motion, it is

ORDERED that counsel previously assigned to prosecute the appeal is relieved of the assignment and is directed to turn over all papers in this action to new counsel herein assigned; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as new counsel to prosecute the appeal:

Richard Lentino, Esq.

138 W. Main Street

Middletown, New York 10940

and it is further,

ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned counsel with a copy of the pre-sentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,

ORDERED that the stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to remake, recertify, and refile two transcripts of the plea proceedings in this action (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of the plea proceedings to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent after counsel reviews said minutes and determines whether he will be filing a supplemental or replacement brief; and it is further,

ORDERED that on or before November 2, 2005, newly assigned counsel shall review the brief filed by former assigned counsel and advise this court in writing whether he will, (1) adopt the brief filed by former counsel, (2) file a supplemental brief, or (3) withdraw the brief filed by former counsel and file a new brief; and it is further,

ORDERED that the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until 60 days after newly assigned counsel either (1) advises this court that he will adopt the brief filed by former counsel, or (2) serves and files a supplemental or replacement brief; and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.

SANTUCCI, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, LUCIANO and FISHER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M28461

E/nal

THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.

BARRY A. COZIER

DAVID S. RITTER

PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.

2003-07867, 2005-07374 The People, etc., respondent, v Samantha Jones, a/k/a Samantha Stalter, appellant. (Ind. Nos. 02-00826, 03-00425)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

On the court's own motion, it is

ORDERED that the decision and order on motion of this court dated May 4, 2004, in the above-entitled case, is amended by (1) deleting from the caption thereof the words "Ind. No. 03-00425" and substituting therefor the words "Ind. Nos. 02-00826, 03-00425"; (2) deleting from the introductory paragraph thereof the words "a judgment" and substituting therefor the words "two judgments"; and (3) deleting from the decretal paragraphs thereof the word "appeal" and substituting therefor the word "appeals."

ADAMS, J.P., COZIER, RITTER and SKELOS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29573

S/sl

THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO

ROBERT A. LIFSON

ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.

2001-01270 The People, etc., respondent, v Clive Tracey, appellant. (Ind. No. 3768/00)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Clive Tracey from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered February 6, 2001. By decision and order on motion dated March 22, 2001, the appellant's motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel was denied with leave to renew upon proper papers. The appellant has not renewed that motion.

Now, upon the court's own motion, it is

ORDERED that the appellant show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal as abandoned (see CPL 460.70[2][c]; 22 NYCRR 670.8[f]) by filing an affidavit on that issue with the Clerk of this court on or before October 7, 2005; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this order to show cause upon the appellant at his last known place of residence or, if he is imprisoned, at the institution in which he is confined, by ordinary mail pursuant to CPL 470.60(2), and the District Attorney, by regular mail.

ADAMS, J.P., MASTRO, LIFSON and LUNN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M29578

S/sl

2000-06000 The People, etc., respondent, v Fitzroy Wright, appellant. (Index No. 76046)

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, Nassau County, rendered June 6, 2000.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until September 16, 2005, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court