Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32676
E/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
|
2005-01575 John Cosenza, respondent-appellant, v 303 Beverly Owners Corp., appellant- respondent.
(Index No. 48540/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant-respondent to stay the trial in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 8, 2005.
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 and cross appeal.
RITTER, J.P., RIVERA, SPOLZINO and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32671
E/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
|
2005-10428 Janet A. Davis, plaintiff-respondent, v Jamaica Hospital Medical Center, defendant third-party plaintiff-appellant; Alan Alberts, third-party defendant-respondent.
(Index No. 24055/02)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the defendant third-party plaintiff-appellant to stay the trial in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 28, 2005.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition and relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
RITTER, J.P., RIVERA, SPOLZINO and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32673
S/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
|
2005-10041 Vassilios Handakas, appellant, v Lola Handakas, respondent. (Index No. 12964/98)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Appeal by Vassilios Handakas from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 26, 2002.
Now, on the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from a judgment entered upon the default of the appellant (see CPLR 5511).
RITTER, J.P., RIVERA, SPOLZINO and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32656
O/nal
HOWARD MILLER, J.P.
STEPHEN G. CRANE
GLORIA GOLDSTEIN
PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.
|
2004-00863
Michael Kowal, etc., appellant, v Deer Park Fire District, s/h/a Deer Park Fire District Board of Fire Commissioners, et al., respondents, et al., defendants. (Index No. 19366/97)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondents for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated December 9, 2003, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated December 20, 2004, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the decision and order of this court, and separate motion by the respondents, inter alia, to stay the trial in the above-entitled action pending determination of the appeal by the Court of Appeals.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motions and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion for leave to reargue or to appeal to the Court of Appeals is denied, with $100 costs; and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion to stay the trial is denied as academic.
H. MILLER, J.P., CRANE, GOLDSTEIN and SKELOS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32675
S/sl
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
STEPHEN G. CRANE
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
|
2004-07888 Barbara R. Lane, appellant, v Michael Hinds, Blum & Bellino, Inc., et al., respondents.
(Index No. 19625/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
The plaintiff, Barbara R. Lane, having appealed to this court from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated August 31, 2004, and having perfected the appeal on March 3, 2005, and the respondents having filed no brief, the matter was placed on this court's calendar for October 3, 2005. By letter dated September 15, 2005, counsel for the respondents advised this court that the instant appeal was being withdrawn. The stipulation withdrawing the appeal which was appended to the letter is dated April 22, 2005. By order to show cause dated October 11, 2005, the parties or their counsel were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered imposing such sanctions and/or costs, if any, against the parties to the appeal or their respective counsel pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.2(g) as this court may deem appropriate.
Now, on the court's own motion and the papers filed in response thereto, it is
ORDERED that within 20 days after service upon it of a copy of this decision and order on motion, Steinberg & Cavaliere, LLP, counsel for the respondents, is directed to pay a sanction in the sum of $500 to the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.1[b]); and it is further,
ORDERED that within 20 days after service upon it of a copy of this decision and order on motion, Young & Bartlett, LLP, counsel for the appellant, is directed to pay a sanction in the sum of $250 to the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.1[b]); and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, shall enter judgment accordingly (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.2); and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, shall serve a copy of this decision and order on motion upon counsel for the parties by regular mail.
Section 670.2(g) of the rules of this court provides, in relevant part, that "[i]f a cause or the underlying action or proceeding is wholly or partially settled * * * or if any cause should not be calendared * * * for some other reason, the parties or their counsel shall immediately notify the court," and "[a]ny attorney or party who, without good cause shown, fails to comply with the requirements of this subdivision shall be subject to the imposition of such costs and/or sanctions as the court may direct" (22 NYCRR 670.2[g]).
Under the circumstances, the failure of counsel for the parties to promptly advise this court that the appeal should not be calendared warrants imposition of sanctions in the amount indicated.
ADAMS, J.P., CRANE, SPOLZINO and LIFSON, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32658
S/nal
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
ROBERT A. LIFSON
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
|
2005-01945
Ilya Makaron, appellant, v Luna Park Housing Corporation, respondent. (Index No. 8818/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 9, 2005.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before November 28, 2005; and it is further,
ORDERED that no further enlargements of time shall be granted.
FLORIO, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LIFSON and LUNN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32669
S/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
|
2005-08478 Michael Nagel, plaintiff-respondent, v Brothers International Food, Inc., defendant third-party plaintiff-appellant; B&B International, Inc., third-party defendant-respondent. (Index No. 32232/02)
| 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 July 12, 2005.
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 trial in the above-entitled action is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal.
RITTER, J.P., RIVERA, SPOLZINO and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32677
S/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
ROBERT A. LIFSON
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
|
2005-09516 William Thompson, Jr., respondent, v Sylvia Kinard Thompson, appellant.
(Index No. 1657/05)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant to stay all proceedings in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 8, 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.
RITTER, J.P., SPOLZINO, LIFSON and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32655
O/nal
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
DAVID S. RITTER
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2005-00140
Charles Dun-Zheng Yan, etc., appellant, v Nancy Klein, respondent. (Index No. 13587/04)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated November 24, 2004.
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 it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 29, 2005, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that no further enlargements of time shall be granted.
ADAMS, J.P., S. MILLER, RITTER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32661
M/nal
|
2005-03892 In the Matter of Joan Batesole-Harmer, appellant, v Robert D. Batesole, respondent. (Docket No. F-1585-02)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Joan Batesole-Harmer from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated April 1, 2005. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on November 21, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is
ORDERED that the respondent's brief shall be served and filed within 30 days of the date of this order.
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
M32664
M/nal
|
2005-07175 In the Matter of Rodney D. (Anonymous), respondent; Presentment Agency, appellant. (Docket No. D-01642-05)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Presentment Agency from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated June 23, 2005. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on November 17, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is
ORDERED that the respondent's brief shall be served and filed within 30 days of the date of this order.
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
M32670
M/nal
|
2005-04409 In the Matter of Samantha D. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. D-01811-04)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Samantha D. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated April 14, 2005. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on November 15, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is
ORDERED that the respondent's brief shall be served and filed within 30 days of the date of this order.
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
M32662
M/nal
|
2005-03691 In the Matter of Otis Harrell, appellant, v Alice Treadwell, respondent. (Docket No. V-4321-01)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Otis Harrell from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, entered March 15, 2005. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on November 18, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is
ORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this order, the briefs of the respondent(s) and the Law Guardian, if any, in the above-entitled appeal, shall be served and filed.
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
M32663
M/nal
|
2005-04461 In the Matter of Darlene L.-B. (Anonymous), respondent, v Claudio B. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. P-04418-05)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Claudio B. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated April 13, 2005. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on November 17, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is
ORDERED that the respondent's brief shall be served and filed within 30 days of the date of this order.
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
M32666
M/nal
|
2005-09952 In the Matter of Lamax McLean, respondent, v Nakisha Bell, appellant. (Docket No. V-12663-03)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Nakisha Bell from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated August 15, 2005. By decision and order on motion of this court dated November 16, 2005, the following attorney was assigned as counsel on the appeal:
Joseph Hanshe, Esq.
116 Greene Avenue
Sayville, New York 11782
(631) 563-2426
Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is
ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected either within 60 days after the receipt by the assigned counsel of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the assigned counsel shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the assigned counsel shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:
(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of any Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or
(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcripts have been received, and indicating the date received; or
(3) if the transcripts have not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that the order of this court dated November 16, 2005, has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken, the date thereof, and the date by which the transcripts are 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
M32678
S/sl
|
2005-03659
In the Matter of Mary V. Neuhaus, petitioner- respondent, v Carl E. DuBois, etc., respondent, Mark J. McGovern, et al., appellants. (Index No. 7256/04)
| ORDER ON APPLICATION Withdraw Appeal on Stipulation |
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated February 3, 2005.
Upon the stipulation of the attorneys for the respective parties, dated August 17, 2005, it is
ORDERED that the appeal is marked withdrawn.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32668
M/nal
|
2005-04033 In the Matter of Joseph O. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Social Services, respondent; Manuel O. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. N-01754-04)
| SCHEDULING ORDER |
Appeal by Manuel O. from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated March 17, 2005. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on November 10, 2005. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is
ORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this order, the briefs of the respondent(s) and the Law Guardian, if any, in the above-entitled appeal, shall be served and filed.
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
M32681
K/nal
A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.
ANITA R. FLORIO
HOWARD MILLER
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT
THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
|
2005-06738
In the Matter of Martin C. Prinner, admitted as Martin Charles Prinner, an attorney and counselor-at-law. Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District, petitioner; Martin C. Prinner, respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 1541879)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District for an order: 1) suspending the respondent from the practice of law pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.4(l)(1)(i) and (iii), upon a finding that he is guilty of professional misconduct immediately threatening the public interest in that he has failed to comply with lawful demands of the Grievance Committee in connection with its investigation of a complaint of professional misconduct and based on uncontroverted evidence of professional misconduct; 2) authorizing it to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding against the respondent; 3) directing the respondent to answer the petition annexed to its Order to Show Cause within 10 days; and 4) referring the issues raised to a Special Referee to hear and report. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department on January 17, 1979, under the name Martin Charles Prinner.
Upon the papers submitted in support of the motion and the papers submitted by the respondent in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.4(l)(1)(i) and (iii), the respondent Martin C. Prinner, admitted as Martin Charles Prinner, is immediately suspended from the practice of law in the State of New York, pending further order of this court; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent shall promptly comply with this court's rules governing the conduct of disbarred, suspended, and resigned attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 691.10); and it is further,
ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, during the period of suspension and until further order of this court, the respondent, Martin C. Prinner, admitted as Martin Charles Prinner, is commanded to desist and refrain from (1) practicing law in any form, either as principal or agent, clerk, or employee of another, (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law of its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4) holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District is hereby authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding in this court against Martin C. Prinner, admitted as Martin Charles Prinner, based on the petition dated July 5, 2005; and it is further,
ORDERED that Gary L. Casella, Chief Counsel to the Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District, 399 Knollwood Road, Suite 200, White Plains, N.Y. 10603, is hereby appointed as attorney for the petitioner in such proceeding; and it is further,
ORDERED that within 20 days after service upon him of a copy of this decision and order on motion, the respondent shall serve an answer upon the petitioner and the Special Referee, and shall file the original answer in the office of the Clerk of this court; and it is further,
ORDERED that the issues raised by the petition and any answer thereto are referred to the Honorable Jerome M. Becker, a former Judge of the Criminal and Family Courts, 641 Lexington Avenue, 4th Floor, New York, N.Y. 10022, as Special Referee to hear and report; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Special Referee shall submit his report within 60 days after the conclusion of the hearing or the submission of post-hearing memoranda; and it is further,
ORDERED that if the respondent, Martin C. Prinner, admitted as Martin Charles Prinner, has been issued a secure pass by the Office of Court Administration, it shall be returned forthwith to the issuing agency and the respondent shall certify to the same in his affidavit of compliance pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.10(f).
We find, prima facie, that the respondent is guilty of professional misconduct immediately threatening the public interest based upon his failure to cooperate with the Grievance Committee and upon other uncontroverted evidence.
The Grievance Committee initiated a sua sponte complaint against the respondent based upon a decision and order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Pagones, J.), dated April 4, 2005, in a civil action on behalf of John R. Kazolias, a former client, seeking recovery of money damages against the respondent on theories of legal malpractice, conversion and replevin.
After successfully representing Mr. Kazolias in a proceeding to remove the Bank of New York as conservator, the respondent became attorney-in-fact and exercised control over his client's investments and personal checking account. The respondent withdrew funds from his client's account and invested them with individuals he knew personally. The respondent failed to pay the sum of $107,800.00 allegedly due to Mr. Kazolias. The court granted partial summary judgment in favor of Mr. Kazolias on the issue of liability, set the matter down for a plenary trial on the issue of damages, and referred the matter to the Grievance Committee for appropriate action.
By letter dated April 21, 2005, sent by first-class mail to the business address reflected in the records of the Office of Court Administration, the Grievance Committee apprised the respondent that he was the subject of a sua sponte complaint, requested his response within 10 days, and advised that his unexcused failure to submit an answer constituted professional misconduct independent of the merits of the complaint. Inasmuch as the Grievance Committee's letter was not returned as undeliverable, the Grievance Committee presumes that it was received by the respondent. The respondent neither submitted an answer nor requested additional time in which to do so.
By letter dated May 13, 2005, the Grievance Committee sent the respondent a second copy of the sua sponte complaint via certified mail. The Grievance Committee requested the respondent's answer within 10 days and advised him that his failure to comply could result in a motion for his immediate suspension. The May 13, 2005 correspondence was received in the respondent's office by Kathleen Jenkins on May 24, 2005. The respondent has neither answered nor requested additional time in which to do so.
The Grievance Committee voted to seek the court's approval to commence a disciplinary proceeding against the respondent and to seek his immediate suspension based upon his failure to answer the sua sponte complaint and the findings of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, that he misappropriated and/or failed to account for funds entrusted to him as a fiduciary on behalf of his former client.
A petition, dated July 5, 2005, containing three charges of professional misconduct, including failing to cooperate with the Grievance Committee, conversion, and commingling was served upon the respondent by the Grievance Committee along with its Order to Show Cause.
In opposition to the Grievance Committee's motion, the respondent submits that the procedures of the Grievance Committee can be fully complied with in a totally cooperative fashion without the need for his interim suspension.
The respondent labels the Kazolias complaint as "totally unfounded frivolous, malicious, repulsive, repugnant and simply based on an attempt to recover (or extort) monies" from him. He describes his client as "having significant immaturity."
He denies any misappropriation and submits that his pursuit of investments on behalf of Mr. Kazolias was in accordance with his position as power of attorney. The respondent has guaranteed the investments and submits that all that remains for determination is the exact amount due Mr. Kazolias.
With respect to his failure to cooperate, the respondent pleads a lack of venality. He notes that his office was in complete disarray from March through June 2005. A portion of his office space was taken by the building owner for construction of an elevator. Files, letters, and documents were lost, misplaced, or destroyed and office equipment was damaged. The day before he was served with the instant Order to Show Cause, the respondent found a May 13, 2005, letter from the Grievance Committee buried in a stack of unopened mail.
With respect to the commingling charge, the respondent admits to a "gross error of Judgment." He asserts that he was guided by convenience rather than adherence to proper procedure regarding the transfer of funds and again asserts that he has given an ultimate guarantee of repayment.
The respondent notes that he is presently handling over 200 open files and that his immediate suspension would harm numerous clients.
Notwithstanding the motivation for his misconduct, the respondent does not dispute the finding of liability by Judge Pagones. Neither his alleged lack of venality nor his client's purported immaturity excuse the respondent's misappropriation. Nor does his admission that his office was in total disarray excuse his duty to cooperate with the Grievance Committee's investigation.
In view of the foregoing, the Grievance Committee's motion is granted, the respondent is immediately suspended from the practice of law, and the Grievance Committee is authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding against him.
PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32659
O/nal
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
DAVID S. RITTER
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2004-02583 The People, etc., respondent, v Joseph Bullard, appellant. (Ind. No. 1322-04)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to serve and file a supplemental brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, rendered February 24, 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 it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant shall file nine copies of the supplemental brief and serve one copy on the District Attorney on or before January 23, 2006.
ADAMS, J.P., S. MILLER, RITTER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division : Second Judicial Department
M32626
F/
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, J.
|
2005-04168 The People, etc., plaintiff, v Darion Carter, defendant. (Ind. No. 9760/98)
| DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the defendant, pursuant to CPL 450.15 and 460.15 for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 24, 2005, which has been referred to me for determination.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is denied.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
Associate Justice
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32425
S/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
|
2005-09403
The People, etc., respondent, v William Duke, appellant.
(Ind. No. 12251/94)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Application by the defendant pursuant to CPL 450.15 and 460.15 for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this court from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 18, 2005, as determined that branch of his motion which sought relief pursuant to chapter 738 of the Laws of 2004, to reduce his sentence, and, in effect, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is denied as unnecessary as so much of the order as determined that branch of the defendant's motion which sought relief pursuant to chapter 738 of the Laws of 2004 is appealable as of right (see L 204, Ch 238, § 23); and it is further,
ORDERED that the defendant's moving papers are deemed to be a timely notice of appeal from that portion of the order dated August 18, 2005, as determined that branch of the defendant's motion which sought relief pursuant to chapter 738 of the Laws of 2004; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the application which is, in effect, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel is granted, and the following attorney is assigned as counsel to represent the defendant on the appeal:
Lynn W. L. Fahey, Esq.
Appellate Advocates
2 Rector Street - 10th Floor
New York, New York 10006
and it is further,
ORDERED that the parties are directed to show cause why an order should or should not be made and entered summarily affirming that portion of the order dated August 18, 2005, as determined that branch of the defendant's motion which sought relief pursuant to chapter 738 of the Laws of 2004 on the ground that pursuant to the defendant's certificate of conviction (see CPL 60.60), a copy of which is attached hereto, the defendant does not stand convicted of a class A-I felony, and therefore is not subject to the provisions of the statute (see L 204, Ch 738), by filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue with the Clerk of this court on or before January 23, 2005; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this order to show cause upon the defendant by ordinary mail pursuant to CPL 470.60(2), at his last known place of residence or, if he is imprisoned, at the institution in which he is confined, and by regular mail upon the attorney herein assigned to represent the defendant and upon the District Attorney.
RITTER, J.P., RIVERA, SPOLZINO and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32657
O/nal
THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P.
SONDRA MILLER
DAVID S. RITTER
REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
|
2005-06907 The People, etc., plaintiff, v Patrick Dwyer, defendant. (Index No. 04-00666)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the defendant pro se on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, rendered March 18, 2005, for leave to reargue a motion pursuant to CPL 460.30 for an extension of time to take an appeal, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied.
ADAMS, J.P., S. MILLER, RITTER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32672
E/sl
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
|
2005-08526, 2005-10857 The People, etc., respondent, v Thomas B. Newman, appellant. (Ind. Nos. 532/03, 540/03)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellant on appeals from two judgments of the County Court, Suffolk County, both rendered July 26, 2005, to continue the stay of execution of said judgments granted by the County Court, Suffolk County, on July 26, 2005, upon certain conditions, including that the appellant post bail in the sum of $1,000, 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 the stay of execution of the judgments granted by the County Court, Suffolk County, on July 26, 2005, is continued pending hearing and determination of the appeals, on the same conditions set forth in the order to show cause dated July 26, 2005, and on the further condition that the appeals are perfected on or before February 21, 2006; and it is further,
ORDERED that this stay shall terminate and be of no further effect, and the defendant shall thereafter surrender to serve the sentences imposed, unless the appeals are perfected on or before February 21, 2006; 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 sentencing court for execution of the sentences.
RITTER, J.P., RIVERA, SPOLZINO and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellate Division : Second Judicial Department
M32625
F/
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, J.
|
2005-03671 The People, etc., plaintiff, v John Parisi, defendant. (Ind. No. 1051-01)
| DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION |
Application by the defendant, pursuant to CPL 450.15 and 460.15 for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this court from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County, dated January 31, 2005, which has been referred to me for determination.
Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the application is denied.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
Associate Justice
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M32679
F/
BARRY A. COZIER, J.P.
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
PETER B. SKELOS
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
|
2005-08640
The People, etc., respondent, v Baisil Trotman, appellant. (Ind. No. 03-00769)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Poor Person Relief and to Assign Counsel Appeal from Judgment |
On the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that the decision and order on motion in the above-entitled case dated November 9, 2005, is recalled and vacated and the following decision and order on motion is substituted therefor:
Motion by the appellant for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, rendered August 10, 2005, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED the motion is 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 appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,
ORDERED that the stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify, and file two transcripts of the proceedings of any pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; and it is further,
ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order and upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned counsel with a copy of the presentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the court and the District Attorney's office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,
ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:
Stephen J. Pittari, Esq.
Legal Aid Society of Westchester County
One North Broadway, 9th Floor
White Plains, New York 10601
and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his representative access to the record for the purpose of preparing the appeal; such access shall include permission to copy the papers insofar as they pertain to the appellant; 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.
COZIER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, SKELOS, and LUNN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Appellant's address:
Please make inquiry to the State Inmate Locator
New York State Department of Correctional Services
Telephone: (518) 457-0043