SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
MOTION DECISIONS FOR OCTOBER 22, 2003

TITLE Case Number
Alsol Enterprises, Ltd. v2003-03555 + 2
Bobinski v Bobinski2003-06957
Burwell v Yonkers General2003-00209
Butt v New York Medical C2003-00167 + 2
Clark v N-H Farms, Inc.2003-03700
Cruciata v Cruciata2003-06451
Dedona Boston Realty Comp2002-10631
Neal v Chase Manhattan Ba2003-07843
Nobles v Procut Lawns Lan2003-03605
One Gateway Plaza, LLC v2003-00822
Tanzi v Town of Brookhave2003-03793
Varella v American Transi2003-01459
Mtr of Carlson v Carlson2003-08307
Mtr of Curbelo v Clemente2003-05921
Mtr of Djemant v Roe2003-08532
Mtr of Ekert v Ekert2003-08486
Mtr of JJD Building Corp2003-08457
Mtr of Manglaviti v Kozak2003-01737
Mtr of Murray v Whalen2003-02283 + 2
Mtr of Nassau County Depa2003-08487
Mtr of Rivera v Administr2003-08628
Mtr of Ronis v Oganjanov2003-05451
Mtr of S. (Anonymous), Mi2003-08633
Mtr of Schubert v Schuber2003-08295
Mtr of Walker v Walker2003-08488 + 1
Mtr of Worner v Worner2003-08300
Peo v Breazil,Terrance2002-07522
Peo v Grunert, Vincent2003-00526
Peo v Nunez, Jose2003-08129
Peo v Smythe, Akeim2001-03092
Peo v Weygant, Lawrence2000-09842







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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3597

S/sl

2003-03555, 2003-03619

Alsol Enterprises, Ltd., respondent,

v Premier Lincoln-Mercury, Inc., appellant.

(Action No. 1)

(Index No. 28657/02)

2003-05105

Premier Lincoln-Mercury, Inc., appellant, v

Alsol Enterprises, Ltd., respondent.

(Action No. 2)

(Index No. 16980/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from three orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, all dated April 14, 2003 (two entered in Action No. 1 and one entered in Action No. 2).

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until December 22, 2003, and the record or appendix on the appeals and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3317

M/mv

2003-06957

Joyce Bobinski, appellant,

v John Bobinski, respondent.

(Index No. 13008/96)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Joyce Bobinski, by permission, from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated August 7, 2003. 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3600

S/sl

2003-00209

Felicia Burwell, etc., et al., appellants,

v Yonkers General Hospital, etc., et al., respondents.

(Index No. 8515/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file their respective briefs on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated December 6, 2002.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondents' time to serve and file their respective briefs is enlarged until November 5, 2003, and the respondents' briefs must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3603

S/sl

2003-00167, 2003-04570, 2003-05450

Khalid M. H. Butt, appellant,

v New York Medical College, et al.,

respondents.

(Appeal Nos. 1 and 3)

Khalid M. H. Butt, appellant-respondent,

v New York Medical College, et al.,

respondents-appellants.

(Appeal No. 2)

(Index No. 8794/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant in Appeal Nos. 1 and 3 and the appellant-respondent in Appeal No. 2 pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on appeals and cross appeals from three orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered November 27, 2002, April 17, 2003, and June 18, 2003, respectively.

ORDERED that the application is granted, and the appellant-respondent's reply brief in response to the brief filed by the respondents in Appeal Nos. 1 and 3 and the respondents-appellants in Appeal No. 2 shall be served and filed on or before November 11, 2003; and it is further,

ORDERED that the reply brief of the respondents-appellants in Appeal No. 2 shall be served and filed on or before November 26, 2003.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3640

D/sl

2003-03700

Carolyn Clark, et al., respondents, v

N-H Farms, Inc., appellant, et al., defendants.

(Index No. 6303/00)

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, Orange County, entered March 27, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 22, 2003, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3316

M/mv

2003-06451

Peter Cruciata, appellant,

v Josephine Cruciata, respondent.

(Action No. 1)

(Index No. 5676/01)

Josephine Cruciata, respondent,

v Peter Cruciata, appellant.

(Action No. 2)

(Index No. 5145/03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Peter Cruciata from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated May 29, 2003. 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3637

S/sl

2002-10631 ORDER ON APPLICATION

Dedona Boston Realty Company, appellant,

v Village of Port Chester, respondent.

(Index No. 7803/99)

Application by the appellant 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 November 7, 2002.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before December 4, 2003.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3652

A/sl

NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.

LEO F. McGINITY

HOWARD MILLER

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2003-07843

Eddie Neal, plaintiff, v Chase Manhattan

Bank Corp., defendant.

(Index No. 82314/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
Motion for Leave to Appeal to
the Appellate Division

Motion by the plaintiff pro se for leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court, Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts, dated June 5, 2003, which affirmed a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, entered August 26, 2002.

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., McGINITY, H. MILLER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3643

J/sl

2003-03605

Christopher Nobles, appellant,

v Procut Lawns Landscaping & Contracting,

Inc., respondent.

(Index No. 7496/01)

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, Rockland County, dated April 11, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 15, 2003, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3641

D/sl

2003-00822

One Gateway Plaza, LLC, appellant, v

Village of Port Chester, et al., respondents.

(Index No. 17125/01)

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, Westchester County, dated December 18, 2002.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until November 13, 2003, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3599

S/sl

2003-03793

Giovana Tanzi, appellant,

v Town of Brookhaven, et al., respondents.

(Index No. 2965/01)

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, Suffolk County, dated March 25, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 22, 2003, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3646

C/sl

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.

NANCY E. SMITH

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

2003-01459

Lafred Varella, appellant, v American

Transit Insurance Company, respondent.

(Index No. 12153/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated January 21, 2003, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated June 23, 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, without costs or disbursements.

SANTUCCI, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO, SCHMIDT and MASTRO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3389

M/mv

2003-08307

In the Matter of Kristine Carlson, respondent,

v Kenneth C. Carlson, appellant.

(Docket No. F-538/00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Kenneth C. Carlson from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated August 22, 2003. 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 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 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3269

M/mv

2003-05921

In the Matter of Adriana J. Curbelo, respondent,

v Hector M. Clemente, appellant.

(Docket No. F-4568/02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Hector M. Clemente from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated September 11, 2003. 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 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 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3392

M/mv

2003-08532

In the Matter of Nancy Theresa Djemant,

respondent, v James Martin Roe, appellant.

(Docket No. F-5218-02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by James Martin Roe from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated August 29, 2003. 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 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 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3398

M/mv

2003-08486

In the Matter of William J. Ekert, respondent,

v Mary L. Ekert, appellant.

(Docket No. O-09057/03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Mary L. Ekert from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated August 14, 2003. 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 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 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3651

A/sl

NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

LEO F. McGINITY

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2003-08457

In the Matter of JJD Building Corp.,

respondent, v L. Stanley Kaufman, etc.,

et al., appellants.

(Index No. 3565/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
Motion to Dismiss Appeal

Motion by the respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated July 24, 2003, on the ground, inter alia, that the order is not appealable as of right (see CPLR 5701[b]).

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

ORDERED that the motion is granted to the extent that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, on the ground that the order is not appealable as of right, and we decline to grant leave to appeal (see CPLR 5701[b]), and the motion is otherwise denied.

SMITH, J.P., KRAUSMAN, McGINITY and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3638

S/sl

2003-01737

ORDER ON APPLICATION

In the Matter of Peter Manglaviti, et al., appellants,

v Robert Kozakiewicz, etc., et al., respondents.

(Index No. 16824/02)

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, Suffolk County, dated November 29, 2002.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before October 31, 2003.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3627

S/sl

2003-02283, 2003-02287, 2003-02290

In the Matter of Margaret Murray, et al.,

respondents, v Dennis Whalen, et al.,

appellants.

(Index No. 3392/99)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from three orders of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 7, 2000, July 24, 2001, and January 13, 2003, respectively.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until January 4, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeals and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3390

M/mv

2003-08487

In the Matter of Nassau County Department of

Social Services, o/b/o Jane Zullo, respondent,

v George Hom, appellant.

(Docket No. F-3296-96)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by George Hom from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated July 31, 2003. 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 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 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3394

M/mv

2003-08628

In the Matter of Michael Rivera, appellant,

v Administration for Children's Services,

respondent.

(Docket No. V-03287-02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Michael Rivera from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated September 10, 2003. 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 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 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3318

M/mv

2003-05451

In the Matter of Maria Ronis, respondent,

v Victor Oganjanov, appellant.

(Docket No. F-05554-00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Victor Oganjanov from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated May 21, 2003. By decision and order of this court dated October 6, 2003, the appellant's motion for leave to prosecute the above-entitled appeal as a poor person was denied. 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 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 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), (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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3395

M/mv

2003-08633

In the Matter of Miracle S. (Anonymous).

Administration for Children's Services, appellant;

Clarence J. (Anonymous), et al., respondents.

(Docket No. Na-11129-03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Administration for Children's Services from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated October 2, 2003. 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 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3388

M/mv

2003-08295

In the Matter of Larissa Schubert, respondent,

v Gregory W. Schubert, appellant.

(Docket No. O-3454-03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Gregory W. Schubert from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated August 6, 2003. 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 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 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3391

M/mv

2003-08488, 2003-08489

In the Matter of Arletha Walker, appellant,

v Eric Walker, respondent.

(Docket Nos. V-981-97/02, V-2975-97/02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by Arletha Walker from two orders of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated August 8, 2003, and August 22, 2003, respectively. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is

ORDERED that the appeals 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 proceeding to be transcribed for the appeals; 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 appeals, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeals 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 appeals; 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 appeals to show cause why the appeals should not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3397

M/mv

2003-08300

In the Matter of Lawrence J. Worner, respondent,

v Susan R. Worner, appellant.

(Docket Nos. V-4528/01, V-4532/01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Susan R. Worner from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated August 11, 2003. 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 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 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 shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M1544

K/sl

SANDRA L. TOWNES, J.

2002-07522

The People, etc., respondent,

v Terrance Breazil, appellant.

(Ind. No. 9013/95)

DECISION, ORDER AND CERTIFICATE
GRANTING LEAVE TO APPEAL
ON MOTION

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 14, 2002, 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 granted; the defendant is granted leave to appeal from the order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 14, 2002, made in this case; and it is further,

CERTIFIED that said order involves questions of law or fact which ought to be reviewed by the Appellate Division, Second Department; and it is further,

ORDERED that the papers which accompanied this application are deemed to be a timely notice of appeal from said order.

SANDRA L. TOWNES

Associate Justice




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3642

D/sl

2003-00526

The People, etc., respondent,

v Vincent Grunert, appellant.

(Ind. No. 2568/02)

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 County Court, Suffolk County, rendered December 10, 2002.

ORDERED that the application is granted and 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 December 8, 2003.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3499

F/

HOWARD MILLER, J.

2003-08129

The People, etc., plaintiff,

v Jose Nunez, defendant.

(Ind. No. 7455/97)

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, Kings County, dated June 17, 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.

HOWARD MILLER

Associate Justice




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3645

C/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2001-03092

The People, etc., respondent,

v Akeim Smythe, appellant.

(Ind. No. 00-00854)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to file exhibits to a supplemental pro se brief on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, rendered March 20, 2001.

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 denied; and it is further,

ORDERED that on the court's own motion, all references in the supplemental pro se brief to the proposed exhibits are deemed stricken.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, LUCIANO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3636

S/sl

2000-09842 ORDER ON APPLICATION

The People, etc., respondent,

v Lawrence Weygant, appellant.

(Ind. No. 99/650)

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County, rendered October 12, 2000.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before December 10, 2003.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk