SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
MOTION DECISIONS FOR OCTOBER 23, 2003

TITLE Case Number
Brandl v Ram Builders, In2003-03124
Brighton House, Inc. v No2003-08693
Coney Island Exhaust, Inc2002-03190
Franklin Credit Managemen2003-08559 + 1
Gandelman v 150 Burns Apa2003-01680
Jemmott v Lazofsky2002-11159
Largo-Chicaiza v Westches2002-08773
Manuel v City of New York2003-03874
Marke v Q.B. Associates2003-06526
Miller v Grand Council of2003-08820
Nowak, d/b/a Nowak Farms2003-02122
Schiros v Tawil2003-08258
Town of Wallkill v CM & S2003-08490
Velazquez v Caravan Bus S2003-02495
Wade v Steinfeld2003-03352 + 1
Mtr of Carroll v Scott2003-08091
Mtr of Dunkin-Pelligrini2003-08690
Mtr of Foreclosure of2003-08740
Mtr of Gilman v Inosencio2003-03492
Mtr of Greco v Zuidema2003-08680
Mtr of L. (Anonymous), Ka2003-08619
Mtr of Lava v Damianou2003-08535
Mtr of Rotering v Roterin2003-08632
Mtr of S. (Anonymous), Ri2003-08681
Mtr of S. (Anonymous), Ve2002-09575 + 2
Mtr of Walker v Wilson-Wa2003-05477
Peo v Gallop, Kalee1999-09302
Peo v Jones, Raymond2002-04226
Peo v Li, Kevin2003-08173
Peo v Turner, Corey2003-05648







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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3681

Y/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-03124

Gary Brandl, et al., plaintiffs-respondents,

v Ram Builders, Inc., defendant third-party

plaintiff-appellant, Lynch Mechanical, Inc.,

et al., defendants-respondents; Brandl

Electric, Inc., third-party defendant-respondent.

(Index No. 27515/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay the trial of the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 10, 2003.

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

ORDERED that the motion is granted, and the trial of the above-entitled action is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3675

O/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-08693

Brighton House, Inc., plaintiff, v

Harold Novick, defendant.

(Index No. 67428/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the defendant for leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court, Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts, dated July 11, 2003, which affirmed a judgment of the Civil Court, City of New York, entered March 27, 2002, and to stay all proceedings to evict him from the subject premises 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 branch of the motion which is for leave to appeal is denied; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for a stay is denied as academic.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3688

O/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.

2002-03190

Coney Island Exhaust, Inc., et al., plaintiffs,

v Mobil Oil Corp., et al., defendants, Adriana

Realty Corp., defendant-respondent, Reaction Corp.,

defendant third-party defendant-appellant, Royal

Petroleum, Inc., et al., defendants-appellants.

(Index No. 26037/95)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellants for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from a decision and order of this court, dated April 21, 2003, which determined an appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 10, 2002.

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., S. MILLER, GOLDSTEIN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3662

T/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-08559, 2003-08560

Franklin Credit Management Corp., plaintiff,

v Jack Pearlman, et al., respondents, Fleet Bank,

f/k/a Norstar Bank, appellant.

(Index No. 16001/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered January 30, 2003, and August 20, 2003, respectively, in effect, to stay enforcement of the order entered August 20, 2003, pending hearing and determination of the appeals.

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

ORDERED that the motion is granted and enforcement of the order entered August 20, 2003, is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeals on condition that the appeals are perfected on or before November 20, 2003; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the appeals are not perfected on or before November 20, 2003, the court, on its own motion, may vacate the stay, or the respondent may move to vacate the stay, on three days notice.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3665

J/sl

2003-01680

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Michael Gandelman, et al., appellants, v

150 Burns Apartment Corp., respondent.

(Index No. 12118/02)

Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 2, 2002.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 19, 2003, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3690

O/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

FRED T. SANTUCCI

THOMAS A. ADAMS

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

2002-11159

Rasheda Jemmott, et al., respondents, v

Miriam Lazofsky, appellant.

(Index No. 14751/97)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondents, in effect, to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 21, 2002, on the ground that the appellant failed to comply with a decision and order on motion of this court dated July 2, 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.

RITTER, J.P., SANTUCCI, ADAMS 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

M3661

C/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2002-08773

Jorge Largo-Chicaiza, plaintiff-respondent,

v Westchester Scaffold Equipment Corp.,

et al., defendants-respondents, Salvatore Sanzo,

appellant.

(Index No. 9826/00)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the defendants-respondents Peter B. McCaffrey and Catherine McCaffrey to stay the trial in the above-entitled action pending the hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 12, 2002.

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

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3660

J/sl

2003-03874

Eric Manuel, et al., appellants-respondents,

v City of New York, respondent,

Michael Miu, respondent-appellant.

(Index No. 9292/99)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellants-respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 13, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants-respondents' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 22, 2003, and the joint record on appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][1]) and the appellants-respondents' 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

M3664

T/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-06526

Selaudin Marke, respondent, v

Q. B. Associates, etc., appellant, et al.,

defendants.

(Index No. 43643/00)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay the trial in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 11, 2003.

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

ORDERED that the motion is granted and the trial in the above-entitled action is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3677

O/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-08820

Mary Miller, et al., respondents, v

Grand Council of the Independent United

Order of Mechanics Friendly Society,

etc., appellant.

(Index No. 44021/01)

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, Kings County, dated October 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 granted and all proceedings in the above-entitled action, including the trial, are stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal on condition that the appeal is perfected on or before November 21, 2003; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the appeal is not perfected on or before November 21, 2003, the court, on its own motion, may vacate the stay, or the respondents may move to vacate the stay, on three days notice.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3663

J/sl

2003-02122

Stanley Nowak, d/b/a Nowak Farms, et al.,

respondents, v Caroline Madura, et al.,

appellants, et al., defendants.

(Index No. 7692/99)

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, Orange County, dated February 13, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 11, 2003, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3698

O/sl

NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

LEO F. McGINITY

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2003-08258

Alfred Schiros, et al., plaintiffs, v Isaac Tawil,

et al., defendants (and a third-party action).

(Index No. 633/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the plaintiffs for leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court, Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts, dated April 24, 2003, which affirmed an order of the Civil Court, City of New York, Kings County, entered April 3, 2002.

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

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

SMITH, J.P., 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

M3680

O/sl

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P.

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-08490

Town of Wallkill, respondent, v

CM & Sons Trucking, Inc., appellant.

(Index No. 5962/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay enforcement of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated September 16, 2003, 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.

SANTUCCI, J.P., LUCIANO, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3666

E/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-02495

Mirtha Velazquez, respondent, v Caravan

Bus Service, Inc., etc., et al., appellants.

(Index No. 49637/00)

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 February 28, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the stipulation of the parties dated October 8, 2003, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted and the trial in the above-entitled action is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3685

O/sl

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, J.P.

THOMAS A. ADAMS

SANDRA L. TOWNES

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

2003-03352, 2003-08019

Jane Wade, respondent, v

Sheldon Steinfeld, appellant.

(Index No. 17276/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a decision of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated February 7, 2003, and to consolidate that appeal with an appeal from a judgment of the same court dated April 18, 2003.

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

ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the appeal from the decision is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from a decision (see Schicchi v Green Constr. Corp., 100 AD2d 509); and it is further,

ORDERED that the application is denied as academic.

GOLDSTEIN, J.P., ADAMS, TOWNES 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

M3667

C/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-08091

In the Matter of Mary Carroll, respondent,

v Ron Scott, appellant.

(Docket No. F-05459/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay enforcement of an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated August 26, 2003, pending the hearing and determination of an appeal therefrom.

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

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3674

O/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-08690

In the Matter of Susan Dunkin-Pellegrini,

appellant, v Charles Pellegrini, respondent.

(Docket Nos. V-3059/03, V-946-02/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay all proceedings in the above-entitled matter pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated October 3, 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 on the court's own motion, the appeal is dismissed, as the order is not appealable as of right and we decline to grant leave to appeal (see Family Ct Act §1112); and it is further,

ORDERED that the motion is denied as academic.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3703

Y/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-08740

In the Matter of Foreclosure of Tax Liens

Town of Harrison, respondent; Loronda

Murphy, appellant.

(Index No. 21562/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay all proceedings in the above-entitled matter pending hearing and determination of an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered August 26, 2003.

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

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3672

C/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-03492

In the Matter of Alan Gilman, et al., respondents,

v Joey San Inosencio, appellant.

(Proceeding No. 1)

In the Matter of Lynn Gilman, et al., petitioners,

v Rachel San Inosencio, respondent.

(Proceeding No. 2)

(Docket Nos. V-5646-02, V-5647-02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal by Joey San Inosencio from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated March 26, 2003. By order to show cause dated September 25, 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 proceedings for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated June 25, 2003, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4.

Now, on the court's own motion, and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation to the order to show cause, it is

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated June 25, 2003 (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]).

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3408

M/mv

2003-08680

In the Matter of Susan Greco, respondent,

v Kenneth Zuidema, appellant.

(Docket No. F-5012-01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Kenneth Zuidema from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated August 8, 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

M3689

D/sl

NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

LEO F. McGINITY

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2003-08619

In the Matter of Karisma D. L. (Anonymous), et al.

Administration for Children's Services,

respondent; Jacqueline L. (Anonymous),

appellant.

(Docket No. N 5045/02, N 5046/02, N 5047/02,

B-17651/03, B-17652/03, V-19094/02, V-19095/02,

V-24512/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

On the court's own motion, it is

ORDERED that its decision and order on motion dated October 21, 2003, in the above-entitled matter is recalled and vacated, and the following decision and order is substituted therefor:

Motion by counsel assigned to represent the appellant in proceedings before the Family Court, Kings County, to be relieved, for the assignment of new counsel to prosecute an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 26, 2003, to grant the appellant leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, for a preference in the calendaring of the appeal, and to stay all proceedings in the above proceedings as well as in a related proceeding to terminate the appellant's parental rights pending in the Family Court, Kings County, pending hearing and determination of the appeal, or, in effect, for summary reversal.

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

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to relieve counsel is granted and counsel assigned by the Family Court is relieved from representing the appellant on the appeal; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branches of the motion which are for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and 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 (see 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) are required promptly to make and certify two transcripts of the proceedings, if any, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 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:

Lawrence A. Salvato, Esq.

P.O. Box 6401

New York, NY 10128

(212) 427-9616

and it is further,

ORDERED that the assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with any scheduling order or orders issued pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for a preference in the calendaring of the appeal is granted, and the appeal will be calendared when it is fully perfected; and it is further,

ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied; 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.

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

M3399

M/mv

2003-08535

In the Matter of Riva Lava, respondent,

v Andreas Damianou, appellant.

(Docket No. P-3894/01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Andreas Damianou from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated August 18, 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

M3406

M/mv

2003-08632

In the Matter of Robert H. Rotering, Jr., appellant,

v Susan C. Rotering, respondent.

(Docket Nos. V-06706-02, V-06707-02

V-06708/02, V-06709/02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Robert H. Rotering, Jr., from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated September 8, 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

M3407

M/mv

2003-08681

In the Matter of Richard S. (Anonymous),

appellant.

(Docket No. D-13398/02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by the juvenile from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated September 18, 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 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

M3671

C/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2002-09575, 2002-09576, 2002-09577

In the Matter of Venus S. (Anonymous), et al.

Administration for Children's Services,

respondent; Sonny B. S. (Anonymous), Sr.,

appellant.

(Proceeding No. 1)

(Docket Nos. N-13431/97, N-13434-5/97)

In the Matter of Emanuel S. (Anonymous), et al.

Administration for Children's Services,

respondent; Sonny B. S. (Anonymous), Sr.,

appellant.

(Proceeding No. 2)

(Docket Nos. N-13430/97, N-13432-3/97)

In the Matter of S. (Anonymous), Children.

Administration for Children's Services,

respondent; Sonny B. S. (Anonymous), Sr.,

appellant.

(Proceeding No. 3)

(Docket Nos. N-13430-5/97)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent to dismiss appeals from two orders and a decision of the Family Court, Kings County, all dated August 30, 2002, on the ground that the appeals have been rendered academic.

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 granted, and the appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3668

C/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-05477

In the Matter of Matthew Walker III, appellant,

v Cathryn L. Wilson-Walker, respondent.

(Docket No. V-18310-98)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal by Matthew Walker III from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated May 22, 2003. By order to show cause dated September 24, 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 a scheduling order dated August 4, 2003, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a).

Now, on the court's own motion, and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation to the order to show cause, it is

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated August 4, 2003 (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]).

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk



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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3687

O/sl

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, J.P.

THOMAS A. ADAMS

SANDRA L. TOWNES

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

1999-09302

The People, etc., respondent,

v Kalee Gallop, appellant.

(Ind. No. 0972/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered September 23, 1999.

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

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

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 22, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

GOLDSTEIN, J.P., ADAMS, TOWNES 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

M3644

J/sl

2002-04226

The People, etc., respondent,

v Raymond Jones, appellant.

(Ind. No. 2199-99)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered March 18, 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 22, 2003.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3752

K/mv

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, J.

2003-08173

The People, etc., respondent,

v Kevin Li, appellant.

(Ind. No. 2729/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant pursuant to CPL 460.50 for a stay of execution of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered September 4, 2003, and to release the appellant on his own recognizance, or in the alternative, to fix reasonable bail.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, and upon hearing the attorneys for the respective parties, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted, execution of the judgment is stayed, and bail is set by the giving of an insurance company bail bond in the amount of $75,000 or by depositing the same sum as a cash bail alternative; and it is further,

0RDERED that this stay shall terminate and be of no further effect 120 days from the date hereof and the appellant shall thereafter surrender to serve the sentence imposed, unless the appeal shall have been brought ot argument or submitted to this court, or unless this court shall have extended this order; and it is further

ORDERED that upon the termination of this stay as provided above, this order shall constitute authorization to any peace officer to arrest and deliver the appellant to the sentencint court to begin the execution of sentence; and it is further,

ORDERED that counsel for the appellant shall serve a copy of this order, by mail, on the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.


WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

Associate Justice




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

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M3670

C/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

ANITA R. FLORIO

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-05648

The People, etc., respondent,

v Corey Turner, appellant.

(Ind. No. 2/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered April 23, 2001, as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel. By decision and order on motion dated September 8, 2003, the appellant was directed to show cause before this court why an order should not be entered dismissing the appeal on the ground that the notice of appeal is untimely, and the motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel was held in abeyance in the interim.

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

ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the notice of appeal is untimely is granted (see CPL 460.10[1][a], 460.30); and it is further,

ORDERED that the motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel is denied as academic.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk