Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31383
A/nal
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
|
2005-09273
Aetna Health, Inc., etc., respondent, v Scott D. Simerman, etc., appellant.
(Index No. 2083/05)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to stay enforcement of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated September 6, 2005, 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.
ADAMS, J.P., LUCIANO, MASTRO and LUNN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31536
S/sl
|
2005-01568, 2005-05585
Jose Canar Astudillo, plaintiff, v Puissance Enterprises, LLC, defendant third-party plaintiff, et al., defendants; BRC Iron Works, Inc., first, second, and fourth third-party defendant; Telemark Construction Management New York, LLC, second third-party plaintiff; Facility Service Corp., third and fourth third-party plaintiff-respondent; Corporate Contractors Ltd., et al., third third-party defendants- appellants. (Index Nos. 35570/01, 75059/02, 75303/02, 75899/02, 75414/03)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the respondent Telemark Construction Management New York, LLC, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 12, 2005, and April 11, 2005, respectively.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the movant's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until November 21, 2005, and the movant'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
M31551
T/nal
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
STEPHEN G. CRANE
DAVID S. RITTER
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2005-09646
Florence Baumoel, respondent, v Joseph Baumoel, appellant. (Index No. 1499-69)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to stay enforcement of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated October 14, 2005, pending hearing and determination of an appeal therefrom.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
FLORIO, J.P., CRANE, RITTER and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31549
R/nal
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
REINALDO E. RIVERA
MARK C. DILLON, JJ.
|
2005-04376, 2005-05643
Ann P. Cedrone, et al., appellants, v Bon Secours Community Hospital, et al., respondents. (Index No. 8481/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion To Dismiss Appeal |
Motion by the respondents Bon Secours Community Hospital and Bon Secours Charity Health System, Inc., to dismiss appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated February 8, 2005, and March 1, 2005, respectively, on the ground that the orders appealed from are not appealable as of right (see CPLR 5512[a]), or in the alternative, to strike certain portions of the appendix on the appeals and the appellants' brief on the ground that they contain or refer to matter dehors the record. Application by the respondents Bon Secours Community Hospital and Bon Secours Charity Health System, Inc., to enlarge the time to serve and file their respondents' brief.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to dismiss the appeal is denied without prejudice to raising the issue in the brief of the respondents Bon Secours Community Hospital and Bon Secours Charity Health System, Inc.; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to strike certain portions of the appendix on the appeals and the appellants' brief on the ground that they contain or refer to matter dehors the record is granted to the extent that pages 457 through 479 of the appendix on appeal on file with this court, and page 4 of the appellants' brief beginning with "On April 20, 2005," through the end of the same paragraph on page 5, are stricken and on or before November 9, 2005, the appellants shall delete or remove the above material from the copies of their appendix and brief on file with this court or serve and file a replacement appendix and brief that does not contain the stricken material, and that branch of the motion is otherwise denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the application is granted, the time of the respondents Bon Secours Community Hospital and Bon Secours Charity Health System, Inc., to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 9, 2005, and the brief of those respondents must be served and filed on or before that date.
H. MILLER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, RIVERA and DILLON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31493
C/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.
|
2004-07152, 2004-11291 Mary R. Davey, respondent, v Peter F. Davey, appellant. (Index No. 10437/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant on appeals from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated July 6, 2004, and (2) an order of the same court dated November 17, 2004, inter alia, in effect, to reargue his motion, among other things, in effect, to recall and vacate so much of a decision and order on motion of this court dated May 13, 2005, as, among other things, dismissed the appeals, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeals, which was determined by decision and order on motion of this court dated September 7, 2005.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
H. MILLER, J.P., RIVERA, SPOLZINO and SKELOS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31562
S/nal
|
2005-04596
Hilda DeJesus, appellant, v Howard E. Tannenbaum, et al., respondents.
(Index No. 9539/03)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
ORDERED that the order on application of this court dated October 24, 2005, in the above-entitled action is amended by deleting from the preamble thereof the words "County Court", and substituting therefor the words "Supreme Court".
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31462
C/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
|
2004-10553 Bruna DeMarquez, appellant, v Angelo J. Gallo, et al., respondents. (Index No. 13806/98)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondents to strike the appellant's appendix on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated August 18, 2004, on the grounds that it contains matters dehors the record and is incomplete, and, effect to strike the appellant's brief on the ground that it refers to matter dehors the record.
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 appellant's appendix and brief are stricken; and it is further,
ORDERED that on or before November 14, 2005, the appellant shall serve and file an appendix and brief which comply with the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.10.2; 22 NYCRR 670.10.3).
ADAMS, J.P., LUCIANO, MASTRO and LUNN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31489
D/sl
|
2005-03872 Julia Dixon, et al., appellants, v City of New York, et al., respondents. (Index No. 3333/01)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 8, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 13, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31469
C/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
|
2005-08319 Maria Dolores Domino, appellant, v Geronimo Domino, respondent. (Index No. 4366/93)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered July 5, 2005, on the ground that the notice of appeal was untimely served.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the notice of appeal which was timely filed, is deemed timely served (see CPLR 5520[a]).
ADAMS, J.P., LUCIANO, MASTRO and LUNN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31518
D/sl
|
2005-01900
Lynn Edelson, et al., appellants, v Placeway Construction Corporation, et al., respondents. (Index No. 19028/98)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered January 24, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 23, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31497
S/sl
|
2005-03830
Jonathan Epple, et al., plaintiffs-respondents, v City of New York, et al., appellants, Doul Construction Corp., defendant-respondent. (Index No. 29575/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 26, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 19, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31563
E/nal
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
PETER B. SKELOS
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
|
2005-09561
John Gandolfo, respondent, v Francis X. DeMasi, defendant, Patrick J. Dunning, et al., appellants.
(Index No. 18268/01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated September 15, 2005, to stay the trial in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal.
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 in the above-entitled action, is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal on condition that the appeal is perfected on or before November 28, 2005; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the appeal is not perfected on or before November 28, 2005, the court, on its own motion, may vacate the stay, or the respondent may move to vacate the stay, on three days notice.
FLORIO, J.P., KRAUSMAN, SKELOS and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31477
C/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
|
2004-11191 Gihon, LLC, respondent, v 501 Second Street, LLC, appellant.
(Index No. 3446/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent, inter alia, to strike the appellant's appendix and brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 29, 2004, on the ground that they contain, or refer to matters dehors the record.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to strike the appendix is granted to the extent that pages 82 through 228 of the appendix are stricken; on or before November 21, 2005, the appellant shall remove those pages of the appendix from the copies of the appendix on file with this court or serve and file a replacement appendix which does not contain that material; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to strike the appellant's brief is granted; on or before November 21, 2005, the appellant shall serve and file a replacement brief which does not refer to matters dehors the record; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 22, 2005; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied.
ADAMS, J.P., LUCIANO, MASTRO and LUNN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31543
Y/nal
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
|
2005-03610
Aryeh Guterman, etc., respondent, v Dynamite Youth Center Foundation, Inc., et al., appellants, et al., defendants. (Index No. 30889/04)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants for leave to withdraw their brief filed August 22, 2005, on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 9, 2005, and for leave to serve and file an amended brief.
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 it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's brief, filed August 22, 2005, is deemed withdrawn; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to serve and file an amended brief is enlarged until November 15, 2005, and the appellant's amended brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 21, 2005, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ADAMS, J.P., LUCIANO, MASTRO and LUNN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31496
C/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
REINALDO E. RIVERA
MARK C. DILLON, JJ.
|
2005-03147 George Hom, appellant, v State of New York, et al., respondents. (Claim No. 107886)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant, inter alia, for poor person relief and the assignment of counsel on an appeal from an order of the Court of Claims, dated January 10, 2005.
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, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from an order denying a motion for reargument (see Simon v Mehsyasi, 16 AD3d 664); and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is denied as academic.
H. MILLER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, RIVERA and DILLON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31468
S/sl
|
2005-04923
Jon Honkala, respondent, v Lee E. Gibson Construction Company, Inc., et al., appellants, et al., defendants. (Index No. 6678/99)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated March 31, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 8, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31533
S/sl
|
2005-01861
Knesses Israel of Sea-Gate, Inc., respondent, v Mesivta of Sea-Gate, Inc., appellant. (Index No. 43114/01)
| 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 and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 22, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until November 23, 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
M31537
S/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
STEPHEN G. CRANE
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2005-01872
Antonio Lopez, plaintiff-respondent, v Gem Gravure Co., et al., defendants, Tadir Air, Inc., n/k/a Tadir Air Conditioning, Inc., defendant third-party plaintiff-appellant; Superflex Management, LLC, defendant second third-party defendant-respondent, et al., third-party defendants and second third-party defendants. 2005-03394, 2005-06174 Antonio Lopez, plaintiff-respondent, v Gem Gravure Co., et al., defendants third-party plaintiffs second third-party plaintiffs-respondents; Superflex Management, LLC, defendant second third-party defendant-appellant, et al., third-party defendants and second third-party defendants.
(Index No. 708814/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
On the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that its decision and order on motion dated October 14, 2005, in the above-entitled case is recalled and vacated, and the following decision and order on motion is substituted therefor:
Motion by Ann C. Chalstrom, an attorney in good standing in the State of Illinois, to be admitted pro hac vice to represent the respondent Superflex Management, LLC, on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 3, 2004, and to represent Superflex Management, LLC, as appellant on appeals from two orders of the same court dated February 18, 2005, and April 29, 2005, respectively.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted.
FLORIO, J.P., CRANE, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31487
D/sl
|
2005-05167
Nicholas Mansfield, respondent, v Salvador Dolcemascolo, et al., appellants. (Index No. 10690/03)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 11, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 17, 2006, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31535
S/sl
|
2004-10579
Deborah Mitchell, appellant, v Tam Equities, Inc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 10192/04)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 18, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until November 14, 2005, and the respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31374
M/nal
|
2005-08184 Mitchell Stuart Nadler, respondent, v Melissa Ann Nadler, appellant. (Index No. 5161/99)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Mitchell Stuart Nadler from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated July 14, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled action shall be perfected within 60 days after the appellant receives the transcripts of the minutes of the action in the Supreme Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received. In cases where there are no minutes to be transcribed, the appeal in the above-entitled action shall be perfected within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes in the Supreme Court action to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31559
S/nal
|
2005-00724
Michelle Y. Pessin, appellant, v Ellen R. Glenn, et al., respondents, Fiorini Landscape Inc., defendant. (Index No. 7528/03)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
ORDERED that the order on application of this court dated October 24, 2005, in the above-entitled action is recalled and vacated and the following order on application is substituted therefor:
Application by the respondents Ellen R. Glenn and John J. Glenn pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated December 21, 2004.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the movants' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until November 17, 2005, and the movants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31464
C/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
|
2005-05086 Mark Poole, etc., et al., appellants, v Palisades Eklecco Corp., et al., respondents. (Index No. 4673/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondents to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated April 14, 2005, on the ground that the right of direct appeal from the order terminated with entry of a judgment dated April 26, 2005.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the notice of appeal from the order dated April 14, 2005, is deemed to be a notice of appeal from the judgment dated April 26, 2005 (see CPLR 5512[a]).
ADAMS, J.P., LUCIANO, MASTRO and LUNN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31495
S/sl
|
2005-04386 Raymond A. Roland, et al., respondents, v Clifford Benson, et al., appellants. (Index No. 2897/01)
| 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, entered March 4, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 28, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31470
D/sl
|
2005-03572
George Sabinas, appellant, v Luis A. Hernandez, et al., respondents. (Index No. 23352/01)
| 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, Kings County, dated January 19, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 12, 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
M31422
D/sl
|
2005-03651
Diana Scarabino, et al., respondents, v Dmitry Ponomarenko, et al., appellants. (Index No. 22514/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 23, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 12, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31406
T/sl
|
2005-03420
Mark Scott, respondent-appellant, v City of New York, et al., appellants- respondents. (Index No. 438/98)
| 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 a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 9, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants-respondents' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 5, 2005, and the joint record on the appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][1]) and the appellants-respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent-appellant shall serve and file its answering brief, including its points of argument on the cross appeal, in accordance with the rules of this court (see NYCRR 670.8[c][3]).
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31481
D/sl
|
2005-03823
Sergey Sushchenko, et al., appellants, v Dyker Emergency Physicians Service, P.C., et al, respondents. (Index No. 16004/02)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 16, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 14, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31484
D/sl
|
2005-03771 Vincent S. Taggart, appellant, v Janet Shaw, et al., respondents. (Index No. 03-02279)
| 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 29, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 19, 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
M31441
R/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
STEVEN W. FISHER
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
|
2005-01953 Uri Tornheim, appellant, v George Kohn, respondent.
(Index No. 2610/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered May 3, 2004, on the ground that the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment dated June 17, 2005, in the action and to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on 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 to dismiss the appeal is referred to the bench hearing this appeal and the appeal from the judgment pending under Appellate Division Docket No. 2005-027281 for determination upon the argument or submission thereof; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until November 14, 2005, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
FLORIO, J.P., KRAUSMAN, FISHER and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31454
O/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
|
2005-08751, 2005-08752 In the Matter of Mya Sherice B. (Anonymous), a/k/a Mya B. (Anonymous), a/k/a Mya L. (Anonymous). SCO Family of Services, respondent; Bernice Sherice L. (Anonymous), et al., appellants. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Eric Edward B. (Anonymous), a/k/a Eric B. (Anonymous). SCO Family of Services, respondent; Bernice Sherice L. (Anonymous), et al., appellants. (Proceeding No. 2) (Docket Nos. B-18218/03, B-22326/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by counsel assigned to represent the appellant Mark B. in proceedings before the Family Court, Kings County, inter alia, to be relieved, for the assignment of new counsel to prosecute appeals from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County (one as to each child), both dated August 19, 2005, respectively, to grant the appellant Mark B. leave to prosecute the appeals as a poor person, and to stay enforcement of the orders 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 branch of the motion which is to be relieved, for the assignment of counsel, and for poor person relief is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appeals 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 appeals, 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 appeals on behalf of Mark B.:
Keith D. Grace, Esq.
111 John Street, Suite 1509
New York, New York 10038
(212) 962-1450
and it is further,
ORDERED that the assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeals expeditiously in accordance with any scheduling order or orders issued pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]); 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 appeals are taken.
ADAMS, J.P., LUCIANO, MASTRO and LUNN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31376
M/nal
|
2005-09518 In the Matter of Denise Behrens, appellant, v Beatrice Rimland, respondent. (Docket No. V-5529-05)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Denise Behrens from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated August 27, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes in the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31312
M/nal
|
2005-09589 In the Matter of Monique Clayburne, appellant, v Shawn Robinson, respondent. (Docket No. V-08081-05)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Monique Clayburne from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated June 2, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31452
T/sl
|
2005-00781
In the Matter of Frank D'Antuono, petitioner, v William E. Phillips, respondent. (Index No. 4771/04)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the petitioner to enlarge the time to perfect a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 which was transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated January 14, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the petitioner's time to perfect the proceeding is enlarged until January 11, 2006, and the petitioner's record or appendix and brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31315
M/nal
|
2005-09654 In the Matter of Virginia Falzarano, respondent, v Maria DeSimpliciis, appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Maria DeSimpliciis, appellant, v Virginia Falzarano, respondent. (Proceeding No. 2) (Docket Nos. O-09306-03, O-09308-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Maria DeSimpliciis from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated September 16, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceedings shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes in the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31385
M/nal
|
2005-09626 In the Matter of Jaime Farlese, respondent-appellant, v Louis Pagan, appellant-respondent. (Docket No. V-08164-01)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated August 15, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal and cross appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant-respondent or the respondent-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-respondent 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/or cross 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 and/or the cross-appeal shall not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31367
M/nal
|
2005-09669 In the Matter of Wenona D. Hauser, appellant, v Antonio F. Pruitt, respondent. (Docket Nos. V-00754-99, V-00755-99, V-00749-05, V-00750-05)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Wenona D. Hauser from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County, dated September 21, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31534
S/sl
|
2005-03965
In the Matter of Elizabeth Hogan, etc., et al., appellants, v New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, et al., respondents. (Index No. 6612/04)
| 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, Queens County, dated January 24, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until November 21, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31373
M/nal
|
2005-09367 In the Matter of Catherine Maiolica, respondent, v Albert J. Maiolica, appellant. (Docket No. F-15013-04)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Albert J. Maiolica from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated August 18, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes in the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31516
M/nal
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
REINALDO E. RIVERA
MARK C. DILLION, JJ.
|
2005-02267
In the Matter of Salvatore Morocco, appellant, v Tara Caporicci, respondent. (Docket No. V-1289-04)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Appeal by Salvatore Morocco from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated February 18, 2005. By order to show cause dated September 27, 2005, the parties or their attorneys were directed to show cause why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated August 1, 2005, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a)(2).
Now, on the court's own motion, and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated August 1, 2005, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a)(2).
H. MILLER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, RIVERA and DILLON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31560
Y/nal
STEPHEN G. CRANE, J.P.
DAVID S. RITTER
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2005-09386, 2005-09387
In the Matter of Marinal Neroni, respondent, v Daniel Treanor, appellant (and another title). (Docket Nos. F-248-05, F-249-05)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant on appeals from two orders of the Family Court, Rockland County, dated August 11, 2005, and September 29, 2005, respectively, to stay enforcement of the order dated September 29, 2005, pending hearing and determination of the appeals.
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.
CRANE, J.P., RITTER, SPOLZINO and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31309
M/nal
|
2005-09613 In the Matter of Roslyn Nieves, respondent, v Michael Gordon, appellant. (Docket No. F-524-96)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Michael Gordon from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated August 1, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31296
M/nal
|
2005-09677, 2005-09680 In the Matter of Shimon O. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. D-15074/05)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeals by Shimon O. from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, both dated September 15, 2005. 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 in the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeals; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcripts have been received, and indicating the date received; or
(3) if the transcripts have not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that they have been ordered, the date thereof and the date by which the transcripts are expected; or
(4) 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), 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 appeals to show cause why the appeals should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31297
M/nal
|
2005-09684, 2005-09686 In the Matter of Naomi Coulter Pressley, appellant, v Timothy McGainey, respondent. (Docket Nos. V-23835-03, V-23836-03, V-23843-03, V-23844-03, O-23842-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeals by Naomi Coulter Pressley from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, both dated September 12, 2005. 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 proceedings to be transcribed for the appeals; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcripts have been received, and indicating the date received; or
(3) if the transcripts have not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that they have been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcripts are 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 or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31528
S/sl
BARRY A. COZIER, J.P.
STEPHEN G. CRANE
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.
|
2004-06657, 2005-03475 In the Matter of Ardelia R. (Anonymous), appellant; New York City Health and Hospital Corporation-Elmhurst Hospital, respondent; Raymond Miles, appellant.
(Index No. 7535/04)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
On the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that its decision and order on motion dated April 28, 2005, in the above-entitled matter is amended by deleting from the caption thereof Appellate Division Docket No. "2005-03975", and substituting therefor Appellate Division Docket No. "2005-03475"
COZIER, J.P., CRANE, LUCIANO and SKELOS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31313
M/nal
|
2005-09621, 2005-09625 In the Matter of Kolien Richmond, respondent, v Robert Perez, appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Robert Perez, appellant, v Kolien Richmond, respondent. (Proceeding No. 2) (Docket Nos. V-01104-05, V-02026-05, V-02905-05, V-04985-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeals by Robert Perez from two orders of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated September 6, 2005, and September 15, 2005, 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 proceedings shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeals; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcripts have been received, and indicating the date received; or
(3) if the transcripts have not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that they have been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcripts are 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 or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31531
S/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
|
2005-01092, 2005-01095 In the Matter of Mollye S. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Richard S. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. N-14260-03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
On the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that its decision and order on motion dated October 21, 2005, in the above-entitled matter is amended by
(1) deleting the first decretal paragraph and substituting therefor the following decretal paragraph:
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to serve and file briefs is granted; and it is further,"
(2) by adding to the last decretal paragraph thereof after the words "shall be granted" the following: "and it is further,"
and (3) by adding thereto after the last decretal paragraph the following decretal paragraph:
"ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied."
ADAMS, J.P., LUCIANO, MASTRO and LUNN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31370
M/nal
|
2005-09682 In the Matter of Peter Samuel, respondent, v Abril Samuel, appellant. (Docket Nos. V-16360-05, V-16361-05, V-16362-05)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Abril Samuel from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 6, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31298
M/nal
|
2005-09344 In the Matter of Gina M. Santiago, respondent, v Gary E. Friedman, appellant. (Docket No. O-10055-05)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Gary E. Friedman from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated September 2, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31306
M/nal
|
2005-09345 In the Matter of Jim Shehata, respondent, v Elizabeth Shehata, appellant. (Docket No. V-3345-95)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Elizabeth Shehata from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated September 13, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes in the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31371
M/nal
|
2005-09687 In the Matter of Richard R. Simpson, appellant, v Beata Ptaszynska, respondent. (Docket Nos. V-02772-00)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Richard R. Simpson from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 13, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) if the appellant is indigent and cannot afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or
(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31307
M/nal
|
2005-09479 In the Matter of Robert L. Smith, appellant, v Margaret Kearns, respondent. (Docket No. V-22432-04)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Robert L. Smith from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated September 2, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes in the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31515
M/nal
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
REINALDO E. RIVERA
MARK C. DILLION, JJ.
|
2005-02237
In the Matter of Kathleen Stuck, appellant, v Frank Squillace, respondent. (Docket No. V-1943/99)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Appeal by Kathleen Stuck from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated January 10, 2005. By decision and order on motion of this court dated August 12, 2005, the appellant was granted leave to renew a motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person on or before September 16, 2005. The appellant has failed to do so. By order to show cause dated September 27, 2005, 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 12, 2005, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a)(5).
Now, on the court's own motion, and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
H. MILLER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, RIVERA and DILLON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31369
M/nal
|
2005-09678 In the Matter of Jonathan T. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. D-17888-05)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Jonathan T. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 19, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes in the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or
(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or
(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,
ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31544
S/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.
|
2005-05325 The People, etc., respondent, v Dean Bennett, appellant. (Ind. No. 2834/04)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the defendant pursuant to CPL 460.50 for a stay of execution of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered May 25, 2005, to release the appellant from jail, and to fix reasonable bail.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
DAVID S. RITTER
Associate Justice
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31519
D/sl
|
2005-03421
The People, etc., respondent, v Marvell Charles-Pierre, appellant. (Ind. No. 304/04)
| 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, Rockland County, rendered April 1, 2005.
ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 12, 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
M31498
C/sl
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
STEVEN W. FISHER
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
|
2005-08538 The People, etc., respondent, v Clarence Ruffin, appellant. (Ind. No. 099/05)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a jury verdict of the County Court, Orange County, dated August 12, 2005, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel. Cross motion by the respondent to dismiss the appeal on the ground that no judgment has been rendered pursuant to the jury verdict on August 12, 2005.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and cross motion and the papers filed in opposition and in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the cross motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed, as no judgment has been rendered in this case; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is denied as academic.
FLORIO, J.P., KRAUSMAN, FISHER and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M31499
C/sl
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
REINALDO E. RIVERA
MARK C. DILLON, JJ.
|
2002-11363 The People, etc., respondent, v Alex Vielman, appellant. (Ind. No. 8891/00)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to relieve assigned counsel on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered November 19, 2002 to substitute retained counsel, to continue his status as a poor person and for leave to file a supplemental brief. The appellant's motion to dispense with printing and for assignment of counsel was granted on December 8, 2003, and the following named attorney was assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:
Lynn W.L. Fahey
Appellate Advocates
2 Rector Street - 10th Floor
New York, New York 10006
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 said assigned counsel is directed to turn over all papers in the action to retained counsel:
Robert DiDio, Esq.
80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 1030
Kew Gardens, New York 11415
and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's poor person status is continued; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant may serve and file a supplemental brief on or before
December 27, 2005; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the decision and order on motion of this court dated July 14, 2005, which granted the appellant's motion for leave to file a supplemental pro se brief is recalled and vacated, and the motion is denied.
H. MILLER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, RIVERA and DILLON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellant's address:
02 A 6570
Shawangunk Corr. Fac.
Box 700
Wallkill, New York 12589