Kings County...29 Queens County Decisions of Interest. Enhanced Voucher Assistance Tenant s Motion To Dismiss Holdover Should Have Been Granted

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Kings County...29 Queens County Decisions of Interest. Enhanced Voucher Assistance Tenant s Motion To Dismiss Holdover Should Have Been Granted"

Transcription

1 nylj.com Wednesday, January 24, First Department Appellate Division...22 Appellate Term...25 New York unty...25 Bronx unty...26 Second Department Appellate Division...26 Kings unty...29 Queens unty...29 Richmond unty...30 Nassau unty...30 Suffolk unty...30 U.S. urts Southern District...31 s of Interest New York Landlord Tenant Law APP. TERM Landlord Tenant Law Kings Landlord Tenant Law Trip to Florida a Visit, Not Relocation; Daughter Entitled to Succeed to Mother s Tenancy Tenant of record Celida Reyes died Sept. 2015; a trial proceeded on Mayra Reyes affirmative defense of succession in this licensee holdover proceeding. Mayra stated she was moved to the premises with her mother and sisters as a child, residing there since. The testimony was corroborated by her son s father, Police Officer Vidal, who testified he lived in the apartment with Mayra from 2008 until 2010, but visited her and his son at least weekly.the parties, including Celida, visited Mayra s sisters in Florida in 2015, and Celida died there; Mayra remained in FL. for several months, returning briefly to NY to check on the apartment, Judge Jean Schneider Civil urt then permanently in March Records supported the testimony, including Mayra s banking, and her son s school records. The court found Mayra was entitled to succeed to Celida s tenancy as there was no doubt she lived in the apartment with Celida from inception until two months before Celida s death. She traveled to FL in 2015, but did not move there as it was intended as a family visit; she remained longer than intended after Celida s death, but returned to the apartment in March 2016 resuming her life in NY and the premises. Enhanced Voucher Assistance Tenant s To Dismiss Holdover Should Have Been Tenant appealed from a final District urt judgment awarding landlord possession in a holdover summary proceeding, and upon reargument, adhered to a prior decision denying tenant s dismissal motion. Landlord alleged that upon expiration of tenant s lease and service of a 30-day notice of termination it commenced this holdover proceeding. Tenant sought dismissal arguing she received enhanced voucher assistance through Section 8 protecting her from eviction without cause. The program entitled the assisted family to elect to remain in the same project it was residing on the eligibility date, and if the right was exercised, Per Curiam 9th & 10th Judicial Districts tenancies may only be terminated for cause. Program tenants had a right to remain in their apartment if they remained eligible and continued to occupy the premises, with no time-limit on the right to remain. A tenant s right to remain would continue in effect and landlord must offer a renewal lease as long as the property was offered as rental housing and tenant received the vouchers, absent good cause to terminate. As landlord did not allege, nor show, tenant lost the right to remain, dismissal should have been granted and the order was reversed. Landlord s Summary Holdover Proceeding Dismissed for Failure to State Cause of Action Landlord sought possession of the premises in this summary holdover proceeding alleging tenant breached a substantial obligation of her tenancy by failing to maintain her Section 8 subsidy due to fraud. Tenant moved for dismissal arguing the subsidy was terminated in 2013 as her apartment repeatedly failed NYCHA s Housing Quality Standards inspections. She noted despite attempts to reinstate the subsidy she was denied on default, but signed a two-year lease with landlord in 2015, paying full rent. Landlord claimed it became aware the subsidy was terminated allegedly from tenant s fraud. The court noted while landlord s notice Judge Eleanora Ofshtein Civil urt stated tenant breached a substantial obligation of her tenancy by failing to maintain her Section 8 subsidy, no additional facts were provided to substantiate a claim under RSC (b). Also, it failed to specify provisions of the lease indicating a condition providing for early termination of the rent-stabilized lease. No violation of a HAP contract was found, as no such contract existed, nor any Section 8 voucher for over four years, dismissing the case for a failure to state a cause of action Post Ave. Heights Assoc. v. Reyes, 84856/15 (Jan. 9) 385 Bayview v. Warren, NC (Dec. 28) 1507 Johns v. Hernandez, 65494/17 (Dec. 22) Queens Landlord Tenant Law Dismissal of Prior Non-Primary Residence Action Renders Golub Notice Stale in Instant Suit Landlord served a notice of intent to refuse a lease renewal--golub notice--in this summary holdover proceeding seeking possession of the premises based on tenant Ortega s non-primary residence. A prior non-primary proceeding was dismissed, and a second suit discontinued; landlord commenced this action without serving a new Golub or 30-day notice. Ortega sought dismissal arguing dismissal of the prior proceeding rendered the Golub notice stale. The court ruled the first nonprimary proceeding was dismissed after a traverse hearing, and such dismissal rendered the Golub notice stale. It noted landlord conceded the prior Judge Joel Kullas Civil urt 30-day notice was the predicate in this proceeding, but without attaching a copy of the Golub notice containing facts necessary to establish the basis for landlord s claim of possession, or including those facts in the 30-day notice, landlord failed to meet RSC (b) requirements, and a predicate notice was unamendable. Landlord could not use the same Golub notice as a basis for this, or any other proceeding, and without a valid Golub notice, landlord failed to state a cause of action, hence, Ortega was granted dismissal. Richmond Landlord Tenant Law Granddaughter Establishes Succession Rights Despite Absence on Leases, Annual Documents Deceased tenant-of-record Crabbe s granddaughter, Johnson, alleged a succession defense at the subject premises in this licensee holdover proceeding claiming she resides in the premises and has done so continuously since 2012, as well as periodically during her childhood. While Johnson was not listed on the family composition or other documents, she claimed same did not deprive her of succession rights she was able to establish. The court stated urts have found that a remaining family member was entitled to succession even if she did not comply with requirements to be listed on annual forms where the family relationship was Judge Marina Mundy Civil urt adequately established. The urt ruled credible evidence supported a finding Johnson continuously resided at the premises with Crabbe for two years preceding her death, noting Johnson s bank records and witness testimony corroborated her claims she lived with Crabbe for that time period. While landlord relied on Johnson s absence on leases and other documents, no other evidence undermined her continuous residency defense. The court concluded Johnson proved she was a successor tenant, dismissing the licensee holdover. Suffolk Creditors and Debtors Rights No Legal Basis Exists Justifying Further Delay of Foreclosure Action, Dismissal is Denied Lisa Packard sought to stay the sale of the foreclosed premises and vacatur of the judgment of foreclosure and sale arguing plaintiff failed to obtain personal jurisdiction over her warranting dismissal. Plaintiff sued to foreclose a mortgage executed by Lisa, who defaulted in making timely payments; its unopposed motion for summary judgment was granted, but foreclosure was stayed, and scheduled sales were canceled based on bankruptcy petition filings one day before each date-- first by Lisa, then by husband Adam. The record showed Lisa was served by substituted service to Adam, thus prima facie evidence existed to sustain Justice Howard Heckman Supreme urt a finding of proper service. Lisa failed to raise triable issues, or provide a specific denial of service, and no basis existed to continue the delay occasioned by the temporary stay of the sale. Also, as Lisa failed to make the required showing of any of the three elements for injunctive relief, she was not entitled to same. The record revealed a pattern of delay by Packards to thwart plaintiff s prosecution of this action, but as no legal basis existed justifying any further delay, Lisa s motion was denied and the stay vacated. Cambridge Leasing Prop. v. Ortega, 66360/17 (Jan. 10) ncord Seaside LP v. Johnson, 50639/16 (Jan. 8) U.S. Bank NA v. Packard, 2265/2014 (Jan. 9) U.S. - SDNY Civil Procedure California s mpulsory unterclaim Rule Bars Claims Against Bank in RICO nspiracy Suit In addition to RICO, breach, and other claims over defraudment by a law firm and its principal (Barkat Defendants), plaintiff investment fund sued JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. over $145,000 allegedly disbursed or invested by the Barkat Defendants in a California Chase bank account absent authorization. On Jan. 17, 2017, a California state court ruled Chase s 2015 interpleader action proper and discharged Chase from liability. Based thereon, Chase sought dismissal from plaintiffs instant RICO conspiracy action under California s compulsory counterclaim rule. District court held plaintiffs claims against Chase barred by California Civil District Judge Alison Nathan Southern District Procedure de Plaintiffs instant claims against Chase were sufficiently related to the interpleader such that the rule applied. Their federal claims arose from the same transaction as the interpleader action. Further, Chase s acts in establishing and maintaining the California account, and filing the interpleader action were logically interrelated and based on many of the same fact issues. U.S. - SDNY Civil Procedure Insurer s Challenge to Settlement s Acceptance Is Unripe, Does Not Meet $75,000 Threshold U.S. Bank (USB) was trustee for an RMBS trust. Ambac claimed the trust lost $367 million due to defective loans by untrywide Home Loans USB sued untrywide in state court in In 2016 USB notified certificate holders of a proposed settlement of the New York action, stayed pending resolution of a trust instruction proceeding in Minnesota. Ambac s second amended complaint (SAC) disputed whether USB s future acceptance of the settlement would breach USB s duties to the trust and its beneficiaries. In 2016 the court denied Ambac a preliminary injunction against USB s acceptance of an amended proposed settlement. District Judge Sidney Stein Southern District Granting USB reconsideration, the court dismissed Ambac s SAC as unripe and for failure to meet the $75,0000 jurisdictional requirement. The court erroneously held most of Ambac s claims justiciable by misconstruing the complaint as alleging a current, not potential, breach.whether the amended proposed settlement s acceptance would constitute a breach of USB s duties also did not present a live controversy. U.S. - EDNY Civil Rights Suit Over Hospital s Substitution as Disaster Aid Recipient Dismissed for Lack of Standing Plaintiffs, residents of Long Beach barrier island communities, were served by Long Beach Medical Center (LBMC). LMBC shut down in 2012 after damage by Superstorm Sandy. FEMA designated it a sub-recipient of $154 million in disaster aid. LMBC sought bankruptcy relief in Feb In May 2014 bankruptcy court approved sale of LMBC s assets to South Nassau mmunity Hospital (SNCH). FEMA approved SNCH as substitute sub-recipient for the funds.invoking 42 USC 1983, the Stafford Act, and FEMA Disaster Assistance Policy , plaintiffs claimed denial of due process in FEMA s decision to permit alternate use of funds originally granted District Judge Denis Hurley Eastern District LMBC. District court dismissed suit for lack of standing noting that plaintiffs failed to show FEMA s actions in allocating and distributing disaster relief funds were nondiscretionary. Further, FEMA met both prongs of the Gaubert test. Thus it was shielded by sovereign immunity from actions brought under the APA. As a result, there was no basis for jurisdiction over plaintiffs claims under 28 USC 2201 and Lewis Family Grp. Fund LP v. JS Barkats P, 16-CV-5255 (Jan. 18) Ambac Assurance v. US Bank Nat l Ass n, 17-CV-446 (Jan. 17) Dubow v. U.S. Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, 2:16-cv-3717 (Jan. 18) U.S. - WDNY Environmental Law ntribution, Indemnification Denied in CWA Suit Over Wetlands Fill The government s Clean Water Act (CWA) enforcement action alleged defendants discharge of fill material into government-owned wetlands, and violation of a 2010 EPA restoration order. Defendants sought contribution and indemnification from 25 third-parties. District court adopted a magistrate judge s report recommending the third-party complaint s dismissal as to most of the third-party defendants, and denial of defendants motion to amend that complaint. New York s contribution statute, CPLR 1401 does not allow defendants to seek contribution for relief sought by the United States. The government did not allege defendants District Judge Richard Arcara Western District were liable for injury to property. It alleged they were liable for violating the CWA. Its second claim alleged defendants violated an EPA order barring them from engaging in the same conduct at issue in the first cause of action. This was not an injury to property but rather an injury to the EPA s authority. The civil penalties and clean-up and restoration costs sought by the government are not recoverable under U.S. - WDNY nstitutional Law nstitutional Challenge to Firearms Licensing Laws Dismissed for Failure to State Claim Plaintiffs amended complaint alleged enforcement of New York Penal Law (3), , (a)(3) and New York s firearm licensing laws---violated their Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights. They also claimed s standards of good moral character, proper cause, and good cause were vague and violated the Fourteenth Amendment s Due Process Clause. District court dismissed suit for failure to state a claim. All claims by plaintiff Libertarian Party were deemed abandoned, and dismissed for lack of Article III standing. Plaintiff Mayor lacked standing because he holds an unrestricted NYS District Judge Frank Geraci Western District firearms license, as does plaintiff Mongielo, whose claims were mooted as speculative and conjectural. The judges who denied plaintiffs license applications were entitled to judicial immunity from suit in both their individual and official capacities. The state s firearms licensing laws satisfied intermediate scrutiny, and thus did not substantially burden conduct protected by the Second Amendment. Don t just settle for the most visibility. Get the right visibility. Lawjobs.com Advantage The Lawjobs.com global network reaches attorneys, paralegals, business development executives, and legal professionals thousands of times a day, including 99% of the NLJ 250. Experience the new Lawjobs.com today. When results matter U.S. v. Whitehill, 14-CV-188 (Jan. 18) Libertarian Party of Erie Cnty v. Cuomo, 15-CV-654 (Jan. 10)

2 Appellate Division First Department Cases decided on: January 23, 2018 By Acosta, P.J., Manzanet-Daniels, Gische, Kapnick, Kahn, JJ PEOPLE, ap v. Jamal x, def-res Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District, New York (Allen Gadlin of counsel), for ap Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Barbara Zolot of counsel), for res Appeal from judgment of resentence, Supreme urt, New York unty (Richard D. Carruthers, J.), rendered September 8, 2015, resentencing defendant, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 10 years, and bringing up for review an order (same court and Justice), entered on or about September 10, 2014, which granted defendant s CPL motion to set aside his sentence as a persistent violent felony offender and directed that he be resentenced as a second violent felony offender, held in abeyance, and the matter remitted for a determination of the additional issue raised in defendant s motion. The court granted defendant s motion on a ground later rejected by the urt of Appeals (see People v. Smith, 28 NY3d 191 [2016]). The parties agree that the appeal should be held in abeyance for a determination of the remaining issue raised in the motion but not reached by the motion court (see e.g. People v. Simmons, 151 AD3d 628 [1st Dept 2017]), specifically, whether defendant s 2003 Queens unty conviction was unconstitutionally obtained because defendant was never informed during the plea proceeding in that case of the term of his incarceratory sentence. By Acosta, P.J., Manzanet-Daniels, Gische, Kapnick, Kahn, JJ Electron Trading,, plf-ap, v. Morgan Stanley &, def-res Mandell Bhandari LLP, New York (Evan Mandel of counsel), for ap Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP, New York (Scott A. Edelman of counsel), for res, Supreme urt, New York unty (Saliann Scarpulla, J.), entered May 24, 2017, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant s motion to dismiss the fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims and the breach of contract claim to the extent it seeks damages above the amount allowed under the contractual limitation of liability clause, and to strike plaintiff s jury demand, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Plaintiff, a developer of intellectual property relating to spread trading, a type of electronic securities trading, entered into two agreements with defendant: an Exclusive License Agreement (ELA) whereby it granted defendant an exclusive license for its alternative trading system (ATS) and a nsulting Services Agreement (CSA) whereby it agreed to perform related consulting services. The ELA required defendant to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and implement necessary software and systems, to operate and market the ATS, and to launch the ATS by a defined deadline. Defendant concedes, for purposes of this motion, that it breached the ELA by not performing any of its obligations. The contested issue at the heart of this appeal is whether plaintiff s damages are limited by the ELA s limitation of liability provision. Defendant is willing to make full payment of any damages that would be due under the limitation of liability provision. Plaintiff contends, however, that it sufficiently alleged intentional wrongdoing on defendant s part to render the limitation of liability provision unenforceable. The complaint alleges that plaintiff designed the ATS to be operated through a dark pool, a private exchange where investors can make trades anonymously. It further alleges that institutional investors would use the product only if assured of total anonymity, because technologically advanced high frequency traders (HFT) could exploit the leakage of information from dark pools to execute transactions nanoseconds ahead of investors trades and thereby siphon off the investors anticipated profits. Plaintiff alleges that it contracted with defendant because of defendant s public statements about its scrupulous maintenance of the anonymity of dark pools and its focus on eliminating pre-trade information leakage priorities that defendant allegedly reiterated during the negotiations leading up to the ELA and the CSA. Neither the ELA nor the CSA refer to HFTs or dark pools, or otherwise expressly contain these representations. Plaintiff claims that not only did defendant fail to perform its obligations under the ELA, but it also told plaintiff that it would perform only if plaintiff either allowed defendant s HFTs to feast on spread traders using the ATS or modified the ATS so that HFTs could prey on other customers. Plaintiff claims that defendant stood to earn hundreds of millions of dollars by catering to HFTs. The limitation of liability provision in the ELA provides, in pertinent part, that neither party s total liability under this agreement will exceed the total amounts previously paid by [defendant] to [plaintiff] under this agreement and the [CSA] prior to the date of the applicable claim. The CSA contains a similar provision. The ELA provides that [t]he parties acknowledge that these limitations of liability and exclusions of potential damages were an essential element in setting consideration under this agreement (all caps deleted). It was not error for Supreme urt to rule on the enforceabilty of the liability limitation provision, although it is an affirmative defense, on a motion to dismiss. In the ordinary course of deciding motions, courts consider whether documentary evidence establishes an asserted defense, in this case a defense concerning the limitation of liability provisions in the parties contracts (see e.g. Zanett Lombadier, Ltd v. Maslow, 29 AD3d 495 [1st Dept 2006]). New York courts routinely enforce such liability-limitation provisions, especially when negotiated by sophisticated parties. The urt of Appeals has recognized that [a] limitation on liability provision represents the parties Agreement on the allocation of the risk of economic loss in the event that the contemplated transaction is not fully executed, which the courts should honor. * * * [The parties] may later regret their assumption of the risks of nonperformance in this manner, but the courts let them lie on the bed they made (Metropolitan Life v. Noble Lowndes Intl., 84 NY2d 430, 436 [1994]). However, such clauses are unenforceable when, [i]n contravention of acceptable notions of morality, the misconduct for which it would grant immunity smacks of intentional wrongdoing. This can be explicit, as when it is fraudulent, malicious or prompted by the sinister intention of one acting in bad faith. Or, when, as in gross negligence, it betokens a reckless indifference to the rights of others, it may be implicit (Kalish-Jarcho, v. City of New York, 58 NY2d 377, [1983]; see Abacus Fed. Sav. Bank v. ADT Sec. Servs.,, 18 NY3d 675, 683 [2012]).The type of intentional wrongdoing that could render a limitation in [a contract] unenforceable is that which is unrelated to any legitimate economic self-interest (Devash v. German Am. Capital, 104 AD3d 71, 77 [1st Dept 2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 863 [2013]; Meridian Capital Partners, v. Fifth Ave. 58/59 Acquisition LP, 60 AD3d 434 [1st Dept 2009]). Stated otherwise, a party can intentionally breach a contract to advance a legitimate economic self-interest and still rely on the contractual limitation provision (Devash, 104 AD3d at 77). Plaintiff contends that defendant s insistence that it allow the ATS to be used for the benefit of HFTs impermissibly exceeded the contemplated scope of the ELA and CSA. However, the ELA gave defendant discretion to modify the ATS, and neither agreement refers to dark pools or protection from predatory HFTs. Thus, in demanding that plaintiff permit use of the ATS by HFTs, defendant was not seeking any benefit that was in conflict with what it was entitled to under the agreement (see Banc of Am. Sec. v. Solow Bldg. II, L.L.C., 47 AD3d 239, 243 [1st Dept 2007], appeal withdrawn 16 NY3d 796 [2011]). Plaintiff s broad allegations that defendant insisted that plaintiff undertake acts constituting securities fraud as a precondition to defendant s performance under the parties contracts does not meet the heightened pleading requirements for fraud (see CPLR 3016[b]; SNS Bank v. Citibank, 7 AD3d 352, 355 [1st Dept 2004]). Although the allegations globally raise issues that have recently come under legal scrutiny about how HFTs operate within dark pools (see e.g., People v. Barclays Capital, 47 Misc 3d 862 [Sup Ct, NY unty 2015]; see also Waggoner v. Barclays PLC, ( F3d, 2017 WL , 2017 US App Lexis [2d Cir 2017]), the complaint is devoid of specific factual instances of fraud by defendant. 1 Plaintiff also fails to provide any explanation of how defendant s alleged acts actually violate the securities laws. Without more, the factual allegations in the complaint are insufficient to avoid the liability-limitation provisions in the parties agreements. At most, the allegations support a claim of intentional breach, which is insufficient to void the limitation of liability provision (see Metropolitan Life, supra; Devash, supra). Supreme urt correctly ruled that the jury waiver in the CSA is applicable to the breach of the ELA claim, given its express applicability to related documents (see e.g. Franklin Natl. Bank of Long Is. v. Capobianco, 25 AD2d 445 [2d Dept 1966]; see also Bank of China, New York Branch v. N.B.M.,, 2002 WL , 2002 US Dist LEXIS 9468 [SD NY May 28, 2002]). The fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims fail to allege actual pecuniary loss sustained as the direct result of the wrong (see Lama Holding v. Smith Barney, 88 NY2d 413, 421 [1996] [internal quotation marks omitted]; Serino v. Lipper, 123 AD3d 34, 42 [1st Dept 2014]). Moreover, even if the alleged loss in the ATS s value could be construed as the requisite out-of-pocket loss, plaintiff s alleged damages are inherently speculative; a factfinder would have to engage in conjecture (see nnaughton v. Chipotle Mexican Grill,, 135 AD3d 535, 538 [1st Dept 2016], affd 29 NY3d 137 [2017]; Rather v. CBS, 68 AD3d 49, 58 [1st Dept 2009] [ loss of an alternative contractual bargain was undeterminable and speculative ] [internal quotation marks omitted]). The complaint fails to allege facts showing that the ATS actually lost value. It does not allege that plaintiff was defrauded into relinquishing to defendant the ATS for value less than its worth; nor does it allege subsequent developments that would show that plaintiff can no longer license the ATS at the price it could command when it executed the ELA and the CSA. 1. In Waggoner, the plaintiffs relied on specific examples of public statements made by the defendant regarding the steps taken to protect its investors from HFTs. By Gische, J.P., Webber, Oing, Singh, Moulton, JJ Michael Harrington, plf-ap, v. The City of New York def-res Amed Marzano & Sediva P, New York (Naved Amed of counsel), for ap Zachary W. Carter, oration unsel, New York (Amanda Sue Nichols of counsel), for res, Supreme urt, New York unty (James E. d Auguste, J.), entered October 13, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, upon plaintiff s motion for reargument and renewal of defendants motion to dismiss the claims for employment discrimination and retaliation under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws (HRLs) or, in the alternative, leave to amend the complaint, granted reargument and adhered to the original determination granting defendant s motion, and denied renewal and leave to amend, unanimously modified, on the law, to grant the motion for renewal, and, upon reargument and renewal, to deny defendants motion, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered November 12, 2015, which granted defendants motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic in light of the foregoing. In this employment discrimination and retaliation action, plaintiff alleges that defendants discriminated against him on the basis of his sexual orientation by refusing to employ him as a police officer and that they also retaliated against him for a previous lawsuit plaintiff filed against defendants in The 2007 action alleged discrimination, retaliation and harassment. Plaintiff was employed as an auxiliary police officer from 1997 to 2000, and as police officer from 2002 until 2009, with the NYPD. In February 2009, plaintiff voluntarily resigned from the NYPD to take a police officer position in California. He then sought to be reinstated as a police officer with the NYPD in June 2009, passing the psychological exam. After plaintiff s request for reinstatement was denied, he directly applied for employment with the NYPD, passing the written exam in While plaintiff s 2010 application was pending, he accepted law enforcement positions with sheriffs departments in Arizona and Missouri, passing at least one more psychological evaluation for those positions. In September 2013, plaintiff began working as a correction officer for the New York City Department of rrection, passing yet another psychological evaluation. He remains employed as a correction officer. In 2007, at a time when plaintiff was employed as a NYPD officer, he filed an action against defendants under the State and City Human Rights Laws (HRLs). The parties settled the 2007 lawsuit on December 12, 2013, with plaintiff signing a general release of all claims accruing up to the settlement date, in exchange for a $185,000 payment from defendants. After settlement, the NYPD instructed plaintiff to proceed with his then-pending 2010 application, and plaintiff underwent another psychological evaluation. Thereafter, plaintiff was informed that his application was being held on a psychological review. It remained on hold for nearly one year before the NYPD found plaintiff not psychologically suited to serve as a police officer. The disqualification was based on the police psychologist s finding that plaintiff relied chiefly on litigation to resolve issues, and cited plaintiff s 2007 action as evidence of his poor stress tolerance. Plaintiff administratively appealed the finding, and submitted a report from his own clinical psychologist, who opined that plaintiff had no psychological characteristics that would prevent him from serving as a police officer. Plaintiff s own psychological report also noted that the police psychologist failed to include psychometric data results that indicated plaintiff met or exceeded requirements in every area of the Job Suitability Snapshot, a series of psychological analytic tests, as well as failed to include the police psychologist s own notes that confirmed that plaintiff s thought processes were coherent and WNL (within normal limits). After the appeal was denied, plaintiff filed the instant action, asserting, as relevant on appeal, causes of action for discrimination and retaliation under the State and City HRLs. Plaintiff sought damages and an order directing defendants to appoint him to the NYPD. Supreme urt dismissed the causes of action. It then denied renewal but granted reargument. Upon reargument, the motion court adhered to its prior decision to dismiss the complaint. We now reinstate the causes of action. The complaint, as amplified by plaintiff s affidavit and psychological report, states claims for both discrimination and retaliation. A plaintiff states a claim of invidious discrimination under the State and City HRLs by alleging (1) that he/she is a member of a protected class, (2) that he/she was qualified for the position, (3) that he/she was subjected to an adverse employment action (under State HRL) or he/she was treated differently or worse than other employees (under City HRL), and (4) that the adverse or different treatment occurred under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination (Santiago-Mendez v. City of New York, 136 AD3d 428 [1st Dept 2016]; Rollins v. Fencers Club,, 128 AD3d 401 [1st Dept 2015], appeal withdrawn 27 NY3d 990 [2016]; Serdans v. New York & Presbyt. Hosp., 112 AD3d 449 [1st Dept 2013]; Executive Law 296; Administrative de of City of NY 8-107). The parties do not dispute that plaintiff has sufficiently pleaded the first three elements of discrimination, to wit, plaintiff is part of a protected class due to his sexual orientation, he was qualified for the position of police officer, having previously served for seven years before voluntarily resigning, and he was treated adversely by having a psychological hold placed on his application and then being found to have failed the evaluation. However, defendants contend that plaintiff has not pleaded facts from which discrimination can be inferred. We disagree. Plaintiff alleged that he had passed six prior law enforcement psychological evaluations, in New York, California, Arizona, and Missouri, before defendants deemed him psychologically unfit for a position with the NYPD, and that in finding others psychologically fit defendants had given preferential treatment to similarly situated heterosexual applicants. Plaintiff further alleged that he was the only applicant whose application had been placed on a psychological review for over 15 months. In his renewal motion, plaintiff provided further support from which to infer discrimination. He submitted the psychological report of his independent clinical psychologist demonstrating his fitness to serve. This report, which did not exist when defendants moved to dismiss, was properly before the court on renewal. Moreover, the report did not need to be in admissible form at this point because the underlying motion was to dismiss (see Lindbergh v. SHLO 54,, 128 AD3d 642, [2nd Dept 2015]). The foregoing, taken together, and affording plaintiff the benefit of every favorable inference, establishes prima facie that defendants discriminated against plaintiff on account of his sexual orientation in finding him psychologically unfit to serve. To make out a prima facie claim of retaliation under the State HRL, a plaintiff must show that (1) he/she has engaged in a protected activity, (2) his/her employer was aware of such activity, (3) he/she suffered an adverse employment action based upon the activity, and (4) a causal connection exists between the protected activity and the adverse action (Forrest v. Jewish Guild for the Blind, 3 NY3d 295, [2004]; Executive Law 296[7]). Under the City HRL, the test is similar, though rather than an adverse action, the plaintiff must show only that the defendant took an action that disadvantaged him or her (Fletcher v. Dakota,, 99 AD3d 43, [1st Dept 2012]; see also Albunio v. City of New York, 67 AD3d 407, 413 [1st Dept 2009], affd 16 NY3d 472 [2011]). Plaintiff alleges that in retaliation for his having commenced the 2007 action against defendants, they placed a psychological hold on his present application for employment in 2014, and ultimately found him psychologically unfit for the position. As an initial matter, plaintiff s retaliation claims are not barred either by his settlement of the 2007 action, or by the general release of all claims that plaintiff could have asserted against defendants until that time. The alleged facts underlying the retaliation claims occurred in February 2014, and were not, therefore, precluded by the general release executed before that date, which waived only causes of action up to and including the date of the execution of this General Release (see Hughes v. Long Is. Univ., 305 AD2d 462 [2d Dept 2003]; see also Swift v. Ki Young Chloe, 242 AD2d 188, 194 [1st Dept 1998]). In finding plaintiff psychologically unfit, defendants police psychologist relied on plaintiff s 2007 action against defendants. Specifically, the police psychologist s report stated that plaintiff had poor stress tolerance and relied chiefly on litigation to resolve issues. The 2007 litigation serving as the psychological disqualifier is sufficient to plead the causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse action in this case. Defendants contend that the 2007 action is not sufficiently temporally proximate to the alleged adverse action to support the causal connection necessary for plaintiff s retaliation claim. While temporal proximity between a protected activity and an adverse employment action may, under some circumstances, be sufficient in itself to permit the inference of a causal connection necessary for a retaliation claim, the fact that actions are not temporally proximate is not necessarily fatal to a retaliation claim. The absence of temporal proximity will not defeat the claim, where, as here, there are other facts supporting causation (see Noho Star v. New York State Div. Of Human Rights, 72 AD3d 448 [1st Dept 2010]; see also Ostrowski v. Atlantic Mut. s., 968 F2d 171 [2d Cir 1992]; but see Matter of Parris v. New York City Dept. of Educ., 111 AD3d 528 [1st Dept 2013], lv denied 23 NY3d 903 [2014]). Plaintiff s allegations are sufficient to permit the inference that the reason plaintiff was found psychologically unfit to serve was because he brought the 2007 action against defendants. This, along with the extensive history of having been found psychologically fit to serve as a police officer and in similar positions, supports an inference that the disqualification was retaliation for bringing the 2007 action. Inasmuch as we are reinstating the discrimination and retaliation causes of action, we find that the appeal from the denial of the motion to amend the complaint is academic Xiang Fu He, plf-res, v. Troon Management,, et al. def-ap [And a Third PaRTY- Action] Rosenbaum & Taylor, P.C., White Plains (Scott Taylor of counsel), for ap Michael H. Zhu, P.C., New York (Michael H. Zhu of counsel), for res, Supreme urt, New York unty (Carol R. Edmead, J.), entered June 23, 2016, which denied defendants motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly. Defendants cannot be held liable for injuries allegedly sustained by plaintiff when he slipped on snow and ice on the sidewalk adjacent to their property, because they were out-of-possession landlords with no contractual obligation to keep the sidewalks clear of snow and ice, and the presence of snow and ice does not constitute a significant structural or design defect (Bing v. 296 Third Ave. Group, L.P., 94 AD3d 413 [1st Dept 2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 815 [2012]; accord Cepeda v. KRF Realty, 148 AD3d 512 [1st Dept 2017]) In re Angelica D., and Another, Dependent Children Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., Deborah D., res-ap, SHELTERing Arms Children & FamiLY SERVices, pet-res Law Offices of Randall S. Carmel, Jericho (Randall S. Carmel of counsel), for ap Dawn M. Shammas, New York, for res Seymour W. James, Jr., The LEGal Aid SOCiETY, New YORk (Claire v. Merkine of counsel), attorney for children. s of fact-finding and disposition (one paper each), Family urt, New York unty (Emily M. Olshansky, J.), entered on or about December 1, 2016, which, after a hearing, determined that respondent mother had permanently neglected the subject children, terminated her parental rights, and committed custody and guardianship of the children to petitioner agency and the mmissioner of the Administration for Children s Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The finding of permanent neglect is supported by clear and convincing evidence that despite the agency s diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship, the mother failed to plan for the children s future (see Social Services Law 384-b[7][a]). The agency made diligent efforts by, among other things, referring the mother for a mental health evaluation, parenting skills and anger management classes, and by scheduling and facilitating visitation with the children (see Social Services Law 384-b[7][f]; see also Matter of Marissa Tiffany C-W. [Faith W.], 125 AD3d 512, 512 [1st Dept 2015]). Throughout this period, however, the mother repeatedly rejected the agency s efforts. She insisted that she did not need services and accused the agency of wrongfully taking the children away. She also refused to provide her home address, and the agency was unable to conduct an essential home visit. The mother s refusal to participate in services and take steps to correct the conditions that led to the removal of the children from their home clearly amounts to a failure to plan for the children s future (see Matter of Cerenithy B. [Ecksthine B.], 149 AD3d 637, 638 [1st Dept 2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1106 [2017]; Matter of Dante Alexander W. [Norman W.], 148 AD3d 492, 493 [1st Dept 2017]). She also failed to visit the children consistently, attending less than half of the permitted visits, which in itself constituted a ground for the finding of permanent neglect (Matter of Angelica S. [Cynthia C.], 144 AD3d 484, 485 [1st Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 1128 [2017]). A preponderance of the evidence supports the determination that termination of the mother s parental rights is in the best interests of the children (Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136, [1984]). A suspended judgment is not appropriate, given the mother s lack of insight into her behavior and the special needs of the children, and given the fact that the children s needs are being met in their foster home, where they have resided since August 2013 and where they are well-bonded with the foster parents, who wish to adopt them (see Matter of Julianna Victoria S. [Benny William W.], 89 AD3d 490, 491 [1st Dept 2011], lv denied 18 NY3d 805 [2012]) E67th plf-ap, v. Oliver Bivins, Jr. def-res Kriss & Feuerstein LLP, New York (Michael J. Bonneville of counsel), for ap Vernon & Ginsburg, LLP, New York (Bari Wolf of counsel), for res, Supreme urt, New York unty (Saliann Scarpulla, J.), entered August 18, 2016, which, insofar as appealed from, granted defendants motion for summary judgment dismissing the breach of contract cause of action and denied plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment on that cause of action, unanimously affirmed, with costs. In the 2013 Summary of Terms (the contract on which plaintiffs sue), defendants Oliver Bivins, Jr. (Oliver Jr.) and Estate of Lorna Bivins agreed to transfer 20 percent of 39 East 67th Street to plaintiff Beachton Tuxedo in exchange for, inter alia, Beachton s release of its claim to 40 percent of 808 Lexington Avenue, which claim was based on an October 2012 agreement between Beachton and Oliver Jr. The motion court found that this consideration was illusory because Oliver Jr. could not have conveyed any interest in 808 Lexington Avenue as of October However, Lorna (Oliver Jr. s mother) owned at least 50 percent, and possibly 100 percent, of the Lexington Avenue property. When she died intestate in February 2011, title to that property vested in Oliver Jr., her only child and heir (see Matter of Kingsland v. Murray, 133 NY 170, 174 [1892]; see also Matter of Ramsdill, 190 NY 492, 495 [1908]). Thus, as the owner of at least 50 percent of 808 Lexington Avenue, Oliver Jr. had the power in October 2012 to agree to give 40 percent of the property to Beachton. We affirm the dismissal of the contract claim. First, the only proper plaintiff on this claim is Beachton; none of the other plaintiffs were parties to the Summary of Terms. Second, as to Beachton, reading the Summary of Terms together with the October 2012 agreement to which it refers (see e.g. Nolfi Masonry v. Lasker- Goldman, 160 AD2d 186, 187 [1st Dept 1990]), it is clear that Beachton had the right to convert its mortgage note into equity as long as the note had not been paid in full. However, in December 2014, Beachton was paid in full. In opposition to plaintiffs cross motion, Oliver Jr. submitted an affidavit saying, I never agreed to give [plaintiff Edward Kuhnel, a member and organizer of Beachton] both the 808 Lexington mortgage and equity to exchange for equity in 67th Street. [I]t was either one or the other. The affidavit that plaintiffs submitted in reply on their cross motion did not dispute this. We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions, and find them unavailing PEOPLE, res, v. HENRY Peguro, def-ap Goldstein & Weinstein, Bronx (Barry A. Weinstein of counsel), for ap Darcel D. Clark, District, Bronx (Emily A. Aldridge of counsel), for res Judgment, Supreme urt, Bronx unty (Dominic R. Massaro, J.), rendered December 8, 2015, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 12 years, unanimously affirmed. Defendant s legal sufficiency claim is unpreserved, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we reject it on the merits. We also find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence supports the inference that when defendant stabbed the victim in the chest he did so with intent to cause serious physical injury. Defendant has not preserved any of his challenges to the court s charge, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that each of the instructions at issue, when viewed as a whole, conveyed the proper standards (see generally People v. Umali, 10 NY3d 417, 427 [2008]). The court correctly instructed the jury on prior inconsistent statements, reasonable doubt and the presumption of innocence, and there was nothing in the charge that was constitutionally deficient. Defendant s challenges to the prosecutor s summation are likewise unpreserved, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find no basis for reversal (see People v. Overlee, 236 AD2d 133 [1st Dept 1997], lv denied 91 NY2d 976 [1992]; People v. D Alessandro, 184 AD2d 114, [1st Dept 1992], lv denied 81 NY2d 884 [1993]). To the extent the record permits review, we find that defendant received effective assistance under the state and federal standards (see People v. Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, [1998]; Strickland v. Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]). Defendant has not shown that counsel s failure to object to portions of the People s summation and the court s charge fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, or that defendant was prejudiced by the lack of these objections (compare People v. Cass, 18 NY3d 553, 564 [2012], with People v. Fisher, 18 NY3d 964 [2012]). We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence Betty Sebrow, plf-ap, v. Joe & Mike Taxi,, def-res, Md N. Mia, etc., def The Berkman Law Office, Brooklyn (Brian Lance Gotlieb of counsel), for ap Thomas Torto, New York (Jason Levine of counsel), for res, Supreme urt, New York unty (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered August 22, 2016, which granted defendant Joe & Mike Taxi, s (J&M) motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Plaintiff alleges that she hailed a taxicab owned by J&M and oper- urt s Judges Photos The Law Journal accepts electronic or printed photographs of judges for this section (head and shoulders shots only). To send by , please submit jpegs of 180 dpi (dots per inch) resolution to com. lor or black/white photos sent by regular mail should be addressed to Art Director, New York Law Journal, 120 Broadway, 5th floor, New York, N.Y WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2018 nylj.com

3 ated by codefendant Mohammed N. Mia, and that Mia made anti-semitic remarks to her, threatened her safety, and misled police officers as to whether she had paid the fare. J&M made a prima facie showing that Mia was not its employee, but rather was an independent contractor, and that it therefore could not be held liable for Mia s acts (see Chainani v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 87 NY2d 370, [1995]). In particular, J&M showed that it leased the taxi to Mia, who received no salary, retained his own fares, and had the sole responsibility and control over the manner and means of providing taxi services (see Bynog v. Cipriani Group, 1 NY3d 193, 198 [2003]; see also Marino v. Vega, 12 AD3d 329, 330 [1st Dept 2004]; Irrutia v. Terrero, 227 AD2d 380, 381 [2d Dept 1996]). Plaintiff s speculation that discovery could lead to relevant evidence was insufficient to overcome J&M s prima facie showing (see Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, [1980]). Plaintiff failed to preserve her contention that the daily taxi lease agreement submitted in support of J&M s motion expired by its terms before the incident. There is no basis to hold J&M vicariously liable under Vehicle and Traffic Law 388 for Mia s intentional actions (see Gomez v. Singh, 309 AD2d 620, 621 [1st Dept 2003]) PEOPLE, res, v. DAVON Suber, def-ap Seymour W. James, Jr., The Legal Aid Society, New York (Mitchell J. Briskey of counsel), ap Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District, New York (Julia hen of counsel), for res An appeal having been taken to this urt by the abovenamed appellant from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered September 15, 2015, Said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, It is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed. unsel for appellant is referred to 606.5, Rules of the AppellateDivision, First Department Efrain Galicia plf-ap, v. Donald J. Trump def-res, John Does 1-4, def Roger J. Bernstein, New York, and Eisner & Dictor, P.C., New York (Benjamin N. Dictor of counsel), for ap Belkin Burden Wenig & Goldman, LLP, New York (Jeffrey L. Goldman of counsel), res, Supreme urt, Bronx unty (Fernando Tapia, J.), entered on or about August 31, 2016, which, insofar as appealed from, granted defendants motion to dismiss plaintiff s third cause of action for tortious interference with political speech/prima facie tort, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The court properly dismissed the third cause of action, which was not brought as a tort claim under 42 USC 1983 for interference with plaintiffs constitutional rights to free speech, but as a claim for tortious interference with political speech, which is not recognized under New York law Gerard Palionis, plf-ap, v. Jakobson Properties, def-res Arnold E. DiJoseph, P.C., New York (Arnold E. DiJoseph, III of counsel), for ap Mischel & Horn, P.C., New York (Scott T. Horn of counsel), for res, Supreme urt, New York unty (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered March 4, 2016, which granted defendants motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs. In this case, defendants owed no duty, statutory or otherwise, to plaintiff to provide continuous illumination in the stairway upon which plaintiff slipped during the ongoing blackout resulting from Hurricane Sandy (see e.g. Kopsachilis v. 130 E. 18 Owners, 11 NY3d 512 [2008]; Viera v. Riverbay, 44 AD3d 577 [1st Dept 2007]). Plaintiff s reliance on Goldstein v. nsolidated Edison of N.Y. (115 AD2d 34 [1st Dept 1986], lv denied 68 NY2d 604 [1986]), is misplaced as the defendant in Goldstein created a dangerous situation by encouraging the tenants to use the unlighted stairways to fetch water from the fire hydrant that the building superintendent had opened up for them. Here, nothing in the record shows that defendants encouraged plaintiff or other tenants to use the unlighted stairs in any way. To the extent plaintiff is arguing that defendants voluntarily assumed a duty of care by taking affirmative acts to alleviate the hazardous condition, and that he relied on such acts to his detriment, the record does not demonstrate that he relied on the actions taken by defendants in deciding to use the stairs to leave the building (see Heard v. City of New York, 82 NY2d 66, [1993]; Nallan v. Helmsley- Spear,, 50 NY2d 507, 523 [1980]) PEOPLE, res, v. Rosemond Bottex, def-ap Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Susan H. Salomon of counsel), for ap Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District, New York (Ross D. Mazer of counsel), for res Judgment, Supreme urt, New York unty (A. Kirke Bartley, Jr., J.), rendered March 31, 2014, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of grand larceny in the fourth degree and petit larceny, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of two to four years, unanimously affirmed. The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, [2007]). The evidence established that defendant committed larceny as to customers of the fraudulent security guard training business where he was employed. The jury could reasonably have concluded that defendant was accessorially liable for false representations and promises made by other participants in the scheme, that he personally made statements that he knew to be false to the customers and that he displayed a consciousness of guilt In re Kenny J.M., A Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years etc., John M., res-ap, AdministrATION for Children s Services, pet-res John R. Eyerman, New York, for ap Zachary W. Carter, oration unsel, New York (Qian Julie Wang of counsel), for res of fact-finding and disposition, Family urt, Bronx unty (Valerie A. Pels, J.), entered on or about November 17, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, determined, after a hearing, that respondent father neglected the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The finding of neglect is supported by a preponderance of the evidence that the father s actions posed an imminent danger to the child s emotional and physical well-being (see Family Ct Act 1012[f][i][B]; 1046[b][i]). The mother testified that the father assaulted her in the presence of the child, who cried and attempted to assist her, and the child s out-of-court statements also described the father attacking the mother (see Matter of Serenity H. [Tasha S.], 132 AD3d 508 [1st Dept 2015]). The father s assertion that the child was not in imminent danger of harm since he witnessed only a single incident of violence is unavailing (see Matter of Allyerra E. [Alando E.], 132 AD3d 472, 473 [1st Dept 2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 913 [2015]; Matter of Madison M. [Nathan M.], 123 AD3d 616, 617 [1st Dept 2014]). The record shows that when the father perpetrated the act of violence against the mother, not only did the child witness it, he became involved in the altercation. He asked his father to stop striking his mother and attempted to assist her, all to no avail, leaving him in tears, which demonstrates an imminent risk of impairment (see Matter of Tavene H. [William G], 139 AD3d 633 [1st Dept 2016]; Matter of Serenity H. [Tasha S.], 132 AD3d at 509). ntrary to the father s assertions, no expert testimony was needed for a showing of impairment (see Matter of Enrique V. [Jose U.V.], 68 AD3d 427 [1st Dept 2009]). Furthermore, there exists no basis to disturb the court s evaluation of the evidence, including its credibility determinations (see Matter of Ilene M., 19 AD3d 106 [1st Dept 2005]) Donald Thomas plf-ap, v. Denise SLATON def-res Busson & Sikorski, P.C., New York (Robert S. Sikorski of counsel), for ap Schwartzman Garelik Walker & Troy, P.C., New York (Donald A. Pitofsky of counsel), for res, Supreme urt, New York unty (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered August 22, 2017, which, to the extent appealed from, in this action for adverse possession, denied plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Triable issues of fact exist as to whether plaintiffs possession of the subject property was hostile and exclusive for the statutory period of 10 years (see generally Brand v. Prince, 35 NY2d 634, 636 [1974]) Ralph Zamboli, etc. plf-res, v. Eleni Dilos-Rogu def, Anibal Puente, def-ap KL Rotondo &, Rye (Kathi Libby Rotondo of counsel), for ap Meagher & Meagher, P.C., White Plains (Keith J. Clarke of counsel), for res, Supreme urt, Bronx unty (Stanley Green, J.), entered on or about November 1, 2016, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendant Anibal Puente s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against him, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly. Defendant established prima facie, through an affirmation by an expert surgeon, that he did not deviate from the accepted standard of medical practice in performing laparoscopic surgery on plaintiffs decedent to repair a ventral hernia and in treating the decedent post-operatively and that there was no causal relationship between the care he rendered and the conditions later suffered by the decedent, including the ileus, bowel perforation and infection (see Anyie B. v. Bronx Lebanon Hosp., 128 AD3d 1, 3 [1st Dept 2015]). In opposition, plaintiffs failed to raise an issue of fact as to either of these elements through his expert s affirmation, which was speculative and unsupported by evidence (see Diaz v. New York Downtown Hosp., 99 NY2d 542 [2002]). Plaintiffs expert opined that defendant departed from accepted practice by performing the surgery laparascopically despite having inadequate visualization of the surgical field and that, as a result, he failed to appreciate that the decedent s bowel was strangulated. However, there is no support in the record for the expert s underlying assumptions that defendant did not have adequate visualization of the surgical field and that the decedent had a strangulated hernia at the time of surgery. Plaintiffs expert opined that defendant departed from accepted practice by failing to perform a physical exam or order any tests during the decedent s two follow-up visits, which would have revealed the presence of an ileus. However, the record reflects that the symptoms of an ileus did not present until after the decedent was no longer under defendant s care. Plaintiffs expert also failed to link defendant s hernia repair surgery and follow-up treatment to any of the conditions diagnosed upon the decedent s subsequent admissions to another hospital First ADVANTAGE LNS, plf-ap, v. LexisNexis Risk Solutions,, def-res Mayer Brown LLP, New York (Evan M. Tager and Daniel F. Fisher of counsel), for ap Morrison & Foerster LLP, New York (Joseph R. Palmore of counsel), for res Judgment, Supreme urt, New York unty (Kathryn E. Freed, J.), entered February 17, 2017, which, among other things, dismissed the amended complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered February 2, 2017, which granted defendants motion to dismiss the amended complaint, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment. Supreme urt correctly dismissed plaintiffs indemnification claims for the cases Freckleton and Baker, as neither is within defendant s indemnification obligations under the Purchase Agreement. Neither case is among the specific matters set forth below in Schedule 9.1(j) of the agreement. Nor were the Freckleton and Baker cases resulting from, attributable to, based upon or arising out of Goode and Goodman v. LexisNexis Risk & Information Analytics Group, (the G&G Action), one of the matters set forth below on Schedule 9.1(j). The Freckleton and Baker suits could have been brought even had the G&G Action never been commenced, and they result from, and are based on, defendant s alleged conduct, not the G&G Action. Plaintiffs construction of 9.1(j)(i) renders 9.1(j)(ii) redundant. Were the phrase in 9.1(j)(i) [t]hose matters set forth below read to include anything other than the specific matters listed, there would have been no need to include the provision at 9.1(j)(ii) involving the same or similar parties, with the same or similar legal issues applied to the same or similar facts or subject matter. We reject plaintiffs efforts to fit Baker, which postdated the limitations period of 9.1(j)(ii), into 9.1(j)(i). A contrary holding would impermissibly strip that provision of all force and effect (see Nautilus v. Matthew David Events, Ltd., 69 AD3d 457, 460 [1st Dept 2010]). We also reject plaintiffs efforts to fit Freckleton into Schedule 9.1(j)(ii), as plaintiffs disregard or contort that subsection s caveat: to the extent such matters below are claims by a Governmental Entity or private classaction. To fit within (j)(ii), Freckleton s claims needed to be the same or similar to the class-action claims asserted in the G&G Action, which they are not. The class-wide claims in G&G are based on different statutory provisions, and do not depend on the accuracy of information in an individual s screening report. In contrast, Freckleton s claim, like the G&G Action individual claims, depends on the accuracy of the reported information (see 15 USC 1681g). Moreover, the facts in the G&G Action class-wide claims are not substantially similar to Freckleton s. Freckleton s claim turns on circumstances specific to each individual employee. In contrast, the G&G Action s class-wide claims concern defendant s alleged systemic failures to provide advance notice or disclose requested information. We disagree that Freckleton and the G&G class claims are substantially similar because both concern Fair Credit Reporting Act violations in the context of the Esteem database. Were this general category the intended scope of indemnification, the parties, sophisticated corporate entities on both sides, could have so indicated. However, the specific language of Schedule 9.1(j) shows that they did not, and we should not read the agreement to imply what they chose not to include (see Ashwood Capital, v. OTG Mgt.,, 99 AD3d 1, 7 [1st Dept 2012]). We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing PEOPLE, res, v. Victor Sanchez, def-ap Seymour W. James, Jr., The Legal Aid Society, New York (Heidi Bota of counsel), for ap Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District, New York (Lindsey Richards of counsel), for res An appeal having been taken to this urt by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty (Maxwell Wiley, J.), rendered November 24, 2015, Said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, It is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed. unsel for appellant is referred to 606.5, Rules of the AppellateDivision, First Department PEOPLE, res, v. Peter Almestica, def-ap Christina A. Swarns, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Rosemary Herbert of counsel), for ap Judgment, Supreme urt, New York unty (Charles Solomon, J.), rendered June 2, 2015, unanimously affirmed. Application by defendant s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v. California, 386 US 738 [1967]; People v. Saunders, 52 AD2d 833 [1st Dept 1976]). We have reviewed this record and agree with defendant s assigned counsel that there are no non-frivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law , defendant may apply for leave to appeal to the urt of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that urt and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that urt or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme urt of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within thirty (30) days after service of a copy of this order. Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the judge or justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other judge or justice. 5512N. Francisco Garcia, plf-res, v. Habacus nstruction, def-ap Robert L. Dougherty, Garden City, for ap Kevin J. Abruzzese, Garden City, for res, Supreme urt, Bronx unty (Ruben Franco, J.), entered October 6, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant Habacus nstruction, (Habacus) summary judgment dismissing the breach of contract cause of action, and denied the branch of defendants motion seeking sanctions and costs, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The motion court correctly ruled that the alleged oral agreement between plaintiff and Habacus for a share of the company s profits during the duration of plaintiff s employment did not violate the statute of frauds. Plaintiff testified that the profit-sharing agreement was for the duration of his employment, which was at will and thus could have been terminated within one year of his hiring (see Cron v. Hargro Fabrics, 91 NY2d 362, 366 [1998]). In addition, issues of fact exist concerning the nature of plaintiff s employment agreement with defendants. The motion court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendants motion for sanctions and costs (see 22 NYCRR ). SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION FIRST DEPARTMENT JANUARY 23, 2018 THE COURT ANNOUNCES THE FOLLOWING MOTION ORDERS: By Acosta,J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Jr., Renwick, Richter, JJ. M Empire Architectural METAL & Glass, plf-res, v. Plaza Residential Owner LP, CPS 1 Realty LP and Argonaut Insurance COMPANY, def-ap, R.P. Brennan General ntractors & Builders, NYS DEPArtment of STATE, John Doe No. 1 through John Doe No. 10, the last ten names being fictitious and unknown to plaintiff, being the persons or entities claiming a lien upon the Premises described herein, def An appeal having been taken from an order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about June 2, 2016, stipulation of the parties hereto, dated November 30, 2017, and due deliberation having been It is ordered that the appeal is withdrawn in accordance with the aforesaid stipulation. M Amar Diarrassouba, an INFANT deceased, by NATural Guardian and Legal Father, AdministrATOr of the ESTATE, Sidiki Diarrassouba, and - AdministrATrix of the ESTATE, MehichATA DiarrASSOuba, Natural Guardian and Legal Mother, and Issouf Diarrassouba, an infant by his NATural Guardians and Legal Parents, Sidiki Diarrassouba, Legal Father, and MehichATA Diarrassouba, Legal Mother, plf-ap, v. The City of New York, New York City POLICE DEPArTMENT, AND CrOSSing Guard FLAVIA Roman, def-res, and John Doe 1-3, (fictitious names to be used until actual names are known), McLane Food Service Distribution, McLane COMPANY,, Robert Carroll Jr. and John Doe 1-3, (fictitious names to be used until actual names are known), def An appeal having been taken from an order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about March 18, 2016, stipulation of the parties hereto, dated October 4, 2017, and due deliberation having been It is ordered that the appeal is withdrawn in accordance with the aforesaid stipulation. M Kevin O nnell, plf-res, v. The Guardian Life Insurance COMPANY of America, def-ap An appeal having been taken from an order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about July 25, 2017, Now, after pre-argument conference and upon reading and filing the stipulation of the parties hereto, so ordered December 19, 2017, and due deliberation having been It is ordered that the appeal is withdrawn in accordance with the aforesaid stipulation. M Carlos Rosas, plf-res, v. Oxford Owners and Norcor Management oration, Defendants-Appellants-res Oxford Owners and Norcor Management oration, Third-Party Plaintiffs- Appellants- res, v. Jerrick ASSOCIATES,, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent- ap An appeal and cross appeal having been taken from an order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about March 2, 2017, Now, after pre-argument conference and upon reading and filing the stipulation of the parties hereto, so ordered December 21, 2017, and due deliberation having been It is ordered that the appeal and cross appeal are withdrawn in accordance with the aforesaid stipulation. By Acosta, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Jr., Richter, JJ. M PEOPLE, res,38876c/12 v. Frank Miller, def-ap Defendant having appealed to this urt from judgments of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, rendered on or about November 19, 2015, as amended by a judgment of resentence, same urt, rendered on or about March 31, 2016, And defendant, through assigned counsel Center for Appellate Litigation, having moved for an order withdrawing the appeal as abandoned, It is ordered that the appeal is deemed withdrawn. By Acosta, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Jr., Renwick, Richter, JJ. M Linda Greene Easley, plfap, v. The Animal Medical Center, Brenna K. Zortman and Shannon ELWELL, def-res An appeal having been taken from an order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about November 28, 2016, And defendant-respondent The Animal Medical Center having moved for an order dismissing plaintiff-appellant s appeal or, in the alternative, striking plaintiff s record on appeal, and for other relief, stipulation of the parties hereto, dated December 4, 2017, and due deliberation having been withdrawn in accordance with the aforesaid stipulation. M PEOPLE, res, v. Manuel Gordon, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about October 17, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Robert S. Dean, Esq., Center for Appellate Litigation, 120 Wall Street, 28th Floor, New York, New York 10005, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for M PEOPLE, res, v. TyshAWN Byrd, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about September 28, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Robert S. Dean, Esq., Center for Appellate Litigation, 120 Wall Street, 28th Floor, New York, New York 10005, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for By order entered November 30, 2017, that branch of defendant s motion which sought to stay the execution of the judgment of conviction, and to set bail pending appeal, was denied by a Justice of this urt. M PEOPLE, res, v. Ronny De Los Santos, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about May 16, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Robert S. Dean, Esq., Center for Appellate Litigation, 120 Wall Street, 28th Floor, New York, New York 10005, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for M PEOPLE, res, v. LATEEF Green, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about March 1, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for By Acosta, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Jr., Richter, JJ. M PEOPLE, res, v. Angel lon, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, rendered on or about August 16, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Christina Swarns, Esq., Office of the Appellate Defender, 11 Park Place, Room 1601, New York, New York 10007, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for By Acosta, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Jr., Renwick, Richter, JJ. M PEOPLE, res, v. Domingo Sierra, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about April 27, 2017, for leave to have the appeal s continued on next page» WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, nylj.com

4 heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for By Acosta, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Jr., Richter, JJ. M PEOPLE, res, v. Dorian Simpson, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, rendered on or about January 19, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for By Acosta, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Jr., Renwick, Richter, JJ. M PEOPLE, res, v. Elvis Solano, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about March 15, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for M PEOPLE, res, v. Daniel Still, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about April 4, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for M PEOPLE, res, v. Edwin Torres, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about March 8, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for M PEOPLE, res, v. BRITTANY Tyler, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about March 21, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for M PEOPLE, res, v. Aaron Vidals, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about April 18, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for M PEOPLE, res, v. Mark Wilkins, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about March 17, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for M PEOPLE, res, v. Alphonso Williamson, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about March 17, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for M PEOPLE, res, v. Walter XICAY, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about April 6, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for CONFIDENTIAL M MATTER of Ja Dore G., A Child Alleged to be Abused/Neglected Under ARTICLE 10 of the Family urt ACT. ADMINISTRATION for Children s Services, pet-res, Cannily G. (Father), res, BARRYMORE S. (Paternal GRANDFATher), res, SYEITA G. (Non-Respondent Mother), BevERLY R. (Paternal Grandmother), res-res Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., The Legal Aid Society, Juvenile Rights Division, for the Child. Respondent-appellant (Paternal Grandmother), Beverly R., having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from two orders of the Family urt, New York unty, both entered on or about October 2, 2017, and for the assignment of counsel, a free copy of the transcript, and for related relief, had thereon, it is ed that the motion is granted to the extent of (1) assigning, pursuant to Article 18b of the unty Law and 1120 of the Family urt Act, Thomas R. Villecco, Esq., 366 North Broadway, Suite #410, Jericho, NY 11753, Telephone No. (516) , as counsel for purposes of prosecuting the appeal; (2) directing the Clerk of said Family urt to have transcribed the minutes of the proceedings held therein, for inclusion in the record on appeal, the cost thereof to be charged against the City of New York from funds available therefor 2 within 30 days (FCA 1121[7]) of service of a copy of this order upon the Clerk; (3) permitting appellant to dispense with any fee for the transfer of the record from the Family urt to this urt. The Clerk of the Family urt shall transfer the record upon receipt of this order; and (4) appellant is directed to perfect this appeal, in compliance with Rule of the Rules of this urt, within 60 days of receipt of the transcripts. Assigned counsel is directed to immediately serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the Family urt. 1. Service of appellant s brief upon respondent(s) shall include assigned counsel s copy of the transcript. CONFIDENTIAL M MATTER of a Family Offense Proceeding Pursuant to ARTIcle 8 of the Family urt Act. Amanda R., pet-res, Daniel A. R., res-res Kenneth M. Tuccillo, Esq., for the Child. Respondent-appellant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from an order of the Family urt, New York unty, entered on or about September 26, 2017, and for assignment of counsel, a free copy of the transcript, and for related relief, had thereon, it is ed that the motion is granted to the extent of (1) assigning, pursuant to Article 18b of the unty Law and 1120 of the Family urt Act, Leslie S. Lowenstein, Esq., 567 Sunset Drive, Woodmere, NY 11598, Telephone No. (516) , as counsel for purposes of prosecuting the appeal; (2) directing the Clerk of said Family urt to have transcribed the minutes of the proceedings held therein, for inclusion in the record on appeal, the cost thereof to be charged against the City of New York from funds available therefor 1 within 30 days (FCA 1121[7]) of service of a copy of this order upon the Clerk; (3) permitting appellant to dispense with any fee for the transfer of the record from the Family urt to this urt. The Clerk of the Family urt shall transfer the record upon receipt of this order; and (4) appellant is directed to perfect this appeal, in compliance with Rule of the Rules of this urt, within 60 days of receipt of the transcripts. Assigned counsel is directed to immediately serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the Family urt. (See M-6113, decided simultaneously herewith.) 1. Service of appellant s brief upon respondent(s) shall include assigned counsel s copy of the transcript. CONFIDENTIAL M MATTER of a Family Offense Proceeding Pursuant to ARTIcle 8 of the Family urt Act. Amanda R., pet-res, Daniel A. R., res-res Kenneth M. Tuccillo, Esq., ATTORNEY FOR the RESPONdent- Child, Addison R. Deborah Nadler, Esq., court attorney for the subject child, having moved on said child s behalf for leave to respond, as a poor person, to the appeal taken from the order of the Family urt, New York unty, entered on or about September 26, 2017, and for assignment of counsel, a free copy of the transcript, and for related relief, granted to the extent of (1) assigning, pursuant to 1120 of the Family urt Act, Kenneth M. Tuccillo, Esq., 591 Warburton Avenue, #576, Hastings on Hudson, NY 10701, Telephone No. (914) , as counsel for purposes of responding to the appeal on the child s behalf; (2) permitting movant to respond to the appeal upon a reproduced respondent s brief, on condition that one copy of such brief be served upon the attorney for respondent-appellant and 8 copies thereof are filed with this urt. (See M-6115, decided simultaneously herewith.) M MATTER of a Neglect Proceeding Under ARTICLE 10 of the Family urt Act. Justin E., Kennya F., Children under Eighteen Years of Age Alleged to be Neglected. Administration for Children s Services, pet-res, Maria E., res, Jose N-R., res-res Respondent-appellant Jose N-R., having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from two separate orders of the Family urt, New York unty, both entered on or about September 8, 2017, and for assignment of counsel, a free copy of the transcript, and for related relief, had thereon, it is ed that the motion is granted to the extent of (1) assigning, pursuant to Article 18b of the unty Law and 1120 of the Family urt Act, Neal D. Futerfas, 50 Main Street, Suite #1000, White Plains, New York 10606, Telephone No , as counsel for purposes of prosecuting the appeal; (2) directing the Clerk of said Family urt to have transcribed the minutes of the proceedings held therein, for inclusion in the record on appeal, the cost thereof to be charged against the City of New York from funds available therefor 1 within 30 days (FCA 1121[7]) of service of a copy of this order upon the Clerk; (3) permitting appellant to dispense with any fee for the transfer ofthe record from the Family urt to this urt. The Clerk of the Family urt shall transfer the record upon receipt of this order; and (4) appellant is directed to perfect this appeal, in compliance with Rule of the Rules of this urt, within 60 days of receipt of the transcripts. Assigned counsel is directed to immediately serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the Family urt. 1. Service of appellant s brief upon respondent(s) shall include assigned counsel s copy of the transcript. CONFIDENTIAL M MATTER of a Proceeding for Custody/vISITATION Under ARTICLE 6 of the Family urt Act. Iliana S., pet-ap, v. Richard P. and Maria S. (DECEASED), res-res MATTER of a Family Offense Proceeding Under ARTICLE 8 of the Family urt Act. Iliana S., pet-ap, v. Richard P., res-res Petitioner-appellant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from an order of the Family urt, New York unty, entered on or about October 19, 2017, and for assignment of counsel, a free copy of the transcript, and for related relief, had thereon, it is ed that the motion is granted to the extent of (1) assigning, pursuant to Article 18b of the unty Law and 1120 of the Family urt Act, Leslie S. Lowenstein, 567 SunsetDrive, Woodmere, New York, 11598, Telephone No , as counsel for purposes of prosecuting the appeal; (2) directing the Clerk of said Family urt to have transcribed the minutes of the proceedings held therein, for inclusion in the record on appeal, the cost thereof to be charged against the City of New York from funds available therefor 1 within 30 days (FCA 1121[7]) of service of a copy of this order upon the Clerk; (3) permitting appellant to dispense with any fee for the transfer of the record from the Family urt to this urt. The Clerk of the Family urt shall transfer the record upon receipt of this order; and (4) appellant is directed to perfect this appeal, in compliance with Rule of the Rules of this urt, within 60 days of receipt of the transcripts. Assigned counsel is directed to immediately serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the Family urt.(see M-6059, decided simultaneously herewith.) 1. Service of appellant s brief upon respondent(s) shall include assigned counsel s copy of the transcript. CONFIDENTIAL M MATTER of a Proceeding for Custody/vISITATION Under ARTICLE 6 of the Family urt Act. Iliana S., pet-ap, v. Richard P. and Maria S. (DECEASED), res-res MATTER of a Family Offense Proceeding Under ARTICLE 8 of the Family urt Act. Iliana S. pet-ap, v. Richard P., res-res Garline Octobre, Esq., court attorney for respondent-respondent father, Richard P., having moved on the father s behalf for leave to respond, as a poor person, to the appeal taken from the order of the Family urt, New York unty, entered on or about October 19, 2017, and for assignment of counsel, a free copy of the transcript, and for related relief, granted to the extent of (1) assigning, pursuant to 1120 of the Family urt Act, Kenneth M. Tuccillo, Esq, 591 Warburton Ave, #576, Hastings on Hudson, NY 10701, Telephone No. (914) , as counsel for purposes of responding to the appeal; (2) permitting movant to respond to the appeal upon a reproduced respondent s brief, on condition that one copy of such brief be served upon the attorney for petitioner-appellant and 8 copies thereof are filed with this urt. (See M-5962, decided simultaneously herewith.) By Acosta, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Jr., Gische, Tom, JJ. M MATTER of a Proceeding for Custody and/or visitation Under ARTICLE 6 of the Family urt Act. Will B., pet-res, v. Nedrah X. M., res-res Respondent-appellant, pro se, having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from the orders of the Family urt, New York unty, entered on or about October 12, 2017 and October 31, 2017, and for leave to have the appeal heard on the original record and upon a reproduced appellant s brief, and for other relief, papers with respect to said motion, It is ordered that said motion is denied. By Acosta, J.P., Sweeny, Jr., Gische, Andrias, Gesmer, JJ. M Metro Sixteen Hotel, plf-res, v. Roland Davis, defap An appeal having been taken from an order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about November 3, 2016, which by order of this urt entered on November 14, 2017 (M-4227), was deemed to be subsumed into the appeal taken from a judgment of the same urt, entered on or about November 16, 2016, And defendant-appellant having renewed his motion for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the aforesaid appeal, for leave to have the appeal heard on the original record and upon a reproduced appellant s brief, and for an enlargement of time to perfect the appeal, papers with respect to said motion, had thereon, it is ed that the motion is granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the May 2018 Term, and otherwise denied. M Juan MARTINEz plf-res, v Avenue Holdings, def, ThyssenkruPP ELEvATOR o- RATION, def-ap Defendant-appellant having moved for an enlargement of time to perfect the appeal taken from an order of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, entered on or about November 21, 2016, granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the May 2018 Term. By Acosta, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Jr., Gische, Tom, JJ. M Frances C. Peters, plfap, v. George Christy Peters and Anna C. Peters, def-res Appeals having been taken from orders of the Supreme urt New York unty, entered on or about July 5, 2016 and February 26, 2016, And plaintiff-appellant having moved for consolidation of the aforesaid appeals, granted to the extent of permitting appellant to prosecute the consolidated appeals upon 9 copies of one record and one set of appellant s points covering the consolidated appeals. The attention of the parties is directed to 22 NYCRR Sua sponte, the time to perfect the consolidated appeals is enlarged to the May 2018 Term. SEALED M MATTER of the APPLICATION of Illan Safit, pet-ap, For a Judgment Pursuant to ARTICLE 78 of the Civil Practice LAW and Rules and mmon LAW Relief, v. Pace University, res-res An appeal having been taken from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about December 5, 2016, And petitioner-appellant having moved to supplement the record on appeal, Now, upon reading and filing the had thereon, both sides to supplement the record on appeal with the affidavits of counsel. In the event that the appellate reply brief discusses this additional material beyond the discussion in the opening brief, respondent may seek leave to submit a response thereto. The respective parties are directed to file 10 copies of all supplemental documents under seal. By Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Jr., Renwick, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, JJ. M MATTER of Amy R. Weissbrod Gurvey, pet, For a Judgment Pursuant to ARTICLE 78 of the Civil Practice LAW and Rules, in the NATure of a Writ of Mandamus, v. Hon. ROLANDO T. ACOSTA, Presiding Justice, APPELLATE Division, First DEPARTMENT, res This proceeding, brought pursuant to CPLR Article 78 in the nature of mandamus, seeks to compel the Presiding Justice of this urt to order the Chief of the Grievance mmittee to produce and turn over to petitioner certain files, Now, upon this urt s own motion, it is ed that the proceeding is transferred to the Appellate Division, Second Department, pursuant to New York nstitution, Article VI, 4(I), for hearing and determination, and it is further, ed that all further proceedings in connection with the proceeding shall be conducted pursuant to the rules of the Appellate Division, Second Department. By Sweeny, Jr., J.P., Richter, Andrias, M Charlette Thompson, plf-ap, v. Andrew R. Toscano def-res Plaintiff-appellant having moved for a further enlargement of time to perfect the appeal taken from the order of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, entered on or about November 18, 2016, granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the May 2018 Term. M Southwest Marine and General Insurance COMPANY, urt s Appellate Division First Department «ntinued from previous page 24 WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2018 nylj.com

5 nylj.com WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, Soilsolution Industries,, Exxonmobil oration and Roux,, plf-ap, v. Preferred ntractors Insurance mpany, and Gilmar Design oration, def-res Plaintiffsappellants having moved for a further enlargement of time to perfect the appeal taken from an order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about December 23, 2016, granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the May 2018 Term. M matter of the Arbitration Attempted to be Had Between State Farm Fire and Casualty mpany, petres, v. Ambers Jackson res-res, and American Transit Insurance mpany, res-res Respondentappellant having moved for an enlargement of time to perfect the appeal taken from an order of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, entered on or about February 21, 2017, granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the May 2018 Term. M matter of the mmitment of Guardianship and Custody of Michaellica W., A Child Under 18 Years of Age Pursuant to 384-b of the Social Services Law of the State of New York New York Foundling Hospital, pet-res, Michael W., res-res Andrew J. Baer, Esq., for the Child. Respondent-appellant having moved for an enlargement of time to perfect the appeal taken from the order of the Family urt, Bronx unty, entered on or about February 24, 2017, granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the May 2018 Term. M Nijo Mills, Claimant-ap v. Claim No City University of New York, res-res Claimant-appellant, pro se, having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from an order of the New York State urt of Claims, entered on or about January 11, 2017, and for leave to have the appeal heard on the original record brief, and for an enlargement of time to perfect the appeal,now, upon reading and filing the papers with respect to said motion, and due deliberation having been It is ordered that said motion is granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the May 2018 Term, and otherwise denied. M Cesar A. Benitez, plfres, v. Church of St. Valentine Williamsbridge New York, def-ap Church of St. Valentine Williamsbridge New York, Third-Party plf-ap, v. St. Thomas Syro-Malabar Catholic Diocese of Chicago in New York Third-Party def-res Defendant/third-party plaintiffappellant having moved for a further enlargement of time to perfect the appeal taken from the order of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, entered on or about September 22, 2015, granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the December 2018 Term. M-6703/M Richard llins, plf-res, v. Kenechukwu Okoli, def-ap Plaintiff-respondent having moved to dismiss the appeal taken from an order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about January 10, 2017 or, in the alternative, granting plaintiff poor person relief to respond to said appeal (M-6703), And defendant-appellant having cross-moved for an enlargement of time to perfect the aforesaid appeal (M-6545), papers with respect to the motion and cross motion, and due deliberation having been It is ordered that the motion to dismiss the appeal is granted unless said appeal is perfected for the May 2018 Term, and is otherwise denied (M-6703). The cross motion is granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the aforesaid appeal to the May 2018 Term (M-6545). By Renwick, J.P., Manzanet-Daniels, Gische, Kahn, Singh, JJ. CONFIDENTIAL m PEOPLE, res, v. Darnelle Watts, def-ap Defendant having moved for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal taken from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, rendered on or about February 15, 2017, for leave to have the appeal heard upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, District of said county and Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Robert S. Dean, Esq., Center for Appellate Litigation, 120 Wall Street, 28th Floor, New York, New York 10005, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for By Renwick, J.P., Richter, Manzanet- Daniels, Kahn, Kern, JJ. M PEOPLE, res, v. Jose Santiago, def-ap Defendant having moved for an enlargement of time in which to file a notice of appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, rendered on or about September 19, 2017, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person upon the original record and a reproduced appellant s brief, and for related relief, granted to the extent of deeming the moving papers as a timely filed notice of appeal and permitting the appeal to be heard on the original record, except that a certified copy of the indictment(s) shall be substituted in place of the original indictment(s), and upon a reproduced appellant s brief, on condition that appellant serves one copy of such brief upon the District of said county and files 8 copies of such brief, together with the original record, pursuant to Rule of the Rules of this urt. pursuant to CPL , Arts. 710 and 730, and of the plea or trial and sentence. The Clerk shall furnish a copy of such transcripts to appellant s counsel, without charge, the transcripts to be returned to this Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., 199 Water Street, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10038, Telephone No , is assigned as counsel for M Fitzmore H. Harris, plfap, v. Mitchell N. Kay, American Express mpany and American Express Centurion Bank, def-res Plaintiff-appellant having moved for an enlargement of time to perfect the appeal taken from an order of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, entered on or about February 3, 2017, granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the May 2018 Term. By Renwick, J.P., Richter, Manzanet- Daniels, Mazzarelli, Andrias, JJ. M untry-wide Insurance mpany, pet-ap, v. Bay Needle Care Acupuncture, P.C., as assignee of Rosa rona, res-res Petitioner-appellant having moved for an enlargement of time to perfect the appeal taken from a judgment of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about February 14, 2017, granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the May 2018 Term. M Panagiotis Savlas, Plaintiff-res-ap, v. The City of New York, Malcolm Pirnie,, URS oration-new York, and URS oration, Defendants- Appellants-res, CSM Engineering, P.C., def-res [And a third-party action] Appeals and a cross appeal having been taken to this urt from the order of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, entered on or about December 2, 2016, And defendant-appellant-respondent The City of New York having moved for an enlargement of time to perfect the appeals and cross appeal, granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeals and cross appeal to the May 2018 Term. M William T. West Plaintiffsres-ap, v. B.C.R.E. -90 West Street,, Defendant-Appellant-res, and Lee Rosen, def An appeal having been taken from the order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about July 19, 2017, and said appeal having been perfected, And defendant-appellant-respondent having moved for a stay of oral argument in the aforesaid appeal pending hearing and determination of a related appeal, which is currently sub judice before this urt,now, upon reading and filing the papers with respect to the motion, and due deliberation having been It is ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of adjourning the appeal to the May 2018 Term. By Renwick, J.P., Richter, Manzanet- Daniels, Kahn, Kern, JJ. CONFIDENTIAL m Robyn Gorman, plf-ap, v. Albert Gorman, def-res Plaintiff-appellant having moved for an enlargement of time to perfect the appeal taken from an order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about January 30, 2017, granted to the extent of enlarging the time to perfect the appeal to the May 2018 Term, with leave to seek further enlargements if necessary. By Renwick, J.P., Tom, Andrias, Singh, Moulton, JJ. CONFIDENTIAL m MATTER of Brighton M., A Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, ap Appellant having moved for reargument of or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the urt of Appeals, from the decision and order of this urt, entered on October 12, 2017 (Appeal No. 4650), denied. By Richter, J.P., Manzanet-Daniels, Kahn, Kern, JJ. M people, res, v. Julio defap An order of this urt having been entered on November 9, 2017 (M-4092), inter alia, granting defendant s motion for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Bronx unty, rendered on or about March 22, 2016, under Indictment No. 2753/14, and assigning counsel therefor,and defendant-appellant having moved for an order amending the order of assignment to include an appeal from the judgment of said urt, also rendered on or about March 22, 2016, under Indictment No. 3302/15,Now, upon reading and filing the papers with respect to the motion, and due deliberation having been It is ordered that said motion is granted to the extent of amending the aforementioned order of assignment to include Indictment No. 3302/15, and extending the poor person relief previously granted to cover same. By Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Gische, Tom, Gesmer, Singh, JJ. M Thomas J. Koeppel, individually and Thomas J. Koeppel, as Executor of Estate of Noel Koeppel, plf-ap, v. 130 East End Ave Tenants, def-res An appeal having been taken to this urt from the order of the Supreme urt, New York unty, entered on or about October 13, 2017, And plaintiffs-appellants having moved for a stay of the order with respect to use and occupancy of the subject apartment, pending hearing and determination of the aforesaid appeal, denied. By Friedman, J. M People v. Gardia, Rolando, a/k/a Quezada, Rolando Leave to appeal to this urt and related relief denied. By Andrias, J. M People v. Gibson, Curtis Leave to appeal to this urt denied. By Andrias, J. M People v. Jones, Allen Leave to appeal to this urt denied. By Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Mazzarelli, Gische, Kapnick, JJ. MATTER of s Who Are in Violation of Judiciary Law Section 468-a: M-32. Shefaali Kiran Desai, admitted on , at a Term of the Appellate Division, First Department Petitioner reinstated as a retired attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof. No opinion. All concur. By Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Mazzarelli, Gische, Kapnick, JJ. MATTER of s Who Are in Violation of Judiciary Law Section 468-a: M Susan Patricia Jordan, admitted on , at a Term of the Appellate Division, First Department Petitioner reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof. No opinion. All concur. By Acosta, P.J., Gische, Tom, Mazzarelli, Oing, JJ. M matter of Scott B. Gilly, a suspended attorney: Petitioner reinstated to the practice of law in the State of New York, effective immediately. No opinion. All concur. By Acosta, P.J., Richter, Manzanet- Daniels, Gische, Webber, JJ. M matter of D. Andrew Marshall, A suspended attorney: granted to the extent of reinstating petitioner to the practice of law in the State of New York, on condition that he immediately register with, and pay to, the Office of urt Administration any applicable registration fees owed in compliance with Judiciary Law 468-a. No opinion. All concur. By Acosta, P.J., Renwick, Richter, Webber, Kahn, JJ. M matter of Leslie Jones Thomas, M An attorney and counselor-at-law: The mmittee s motion is granted to the extent of affirming the referee s findings relating to charges one, two, three, four and nine; the referee s finding with respect to charge five is disaffirmed and sustained; respondent s cross motion is granted only to the extent of affirming the referee s sanction recommendation; and respondent is censured. Opinion Per Curiam. All concur. The following order was entered and filed on January 19, 2018: By Acosta, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Jr., Renwick, Richter, JJ. M PEOPLE res, v. Eric Braverman, def-ap An order of the Appellate Term, First Department having been entered on August 14, 2017, transferring the above-referenced case to the Appellate Division, First Department, Now, upon the urt s own motion, it is, ed that the appeal is transferred to the Appellate Division, Second Department, for disposition. Appellate Term First Department The following orders on motion were filed and entered on January 22, By: Shulman, P.J., Ling-han, Gonzalez, JJ THE PEOPLE OF THE State OF NEW YORK, app, v. robert bryant, def-res (Laurence E. Busching, J.), dated April 27, 2016, reversed, on the law, and the superseding information reinstated. Criminal urt erred in dismissing the accusatory instrument on facial sufficiency and speedy trial grounds. The People s superseding information, filed on November 2, 2015, was not jurisdictionally defective. The instrument contained sworn allegations by a police sergeant alleging that he was flagged down by an individual prior to receiving a radio run for an assault in progress; that upon arriving at the [stated] location, a private house, he observed the complaining witness, who was crying and visibly upset, sitting on the front steps bleeding from the mouth, missing a tooth and [with] swelling on her forehead ; and that the complaining witness identified her husband as the perpetrator, stating MY HUSBAND beat ME UP. HE IS IN THE HOUSE. HIS NAME IS robert. HE PUNCHED ME NUMEROUS TIMES IN THE face. Giving these facts a fair and not overly restrictive or technical reading (People v. Casey, 95 NYd 354, 360 [2000]), we find the sworn police allegations were sufficient to establish reasonable cause to believe and a prima facie case that defendant was guilty of assault in the third degree (see Penal Law [1]) and harassment in the second degree (see Penal Law [1]). ntrary to defendant s contention, the superseding information satisfied the nonhearsay requirement of CPL (1)(c) since it contained either nonhearsay allegations or allegations which would be admissible under some hearsay rule exception (People v. Casey, 95 NY2d at 361). In this regard, the allegations reasonably justify the conclusion that the victim s statements to the officer qualify for admission under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule (see People v. Johnson, 1 NY3d 302 [2003]), since the statements were made while still under the influence of the stress of the incident (see People v. Johnson, 129 AD3d 486 [2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 1089 [2015]; People v. Auleta, 82 AD3d 1417, 1419 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 813 [2011]; People v. Mitchell, 46 AD3d 480 [2007], lv denied 10 NY3d 842 [2008]), and not under the impetus of studied reflection (see People v. Edwards, 47 NY2d 493, 497 [1979]). Inasmuch as the People converted the accusatory instrument into a facially sufficient information on November 2, 2015, which was well within the period of readiness prescribed by CPL 30.30[1][b]), the motion to dismiss on speedy trial grounds should have been denied. THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE court. January 22, THE PEOPLE OF THE State OF NEW YORK, res, v. JOSE CESPEDES, def-app Judgment of conviction (John J. DeLury, J.H.O.) rendered, February 27, 2014, affirmed. The accusatory instrument was not jurisdictionally defective. Police allegations that, on a particular date and time, and in f/o 231 Edgecombe Avenue, defendant was observed urinating in public view, were sufficient for pleading purposes to charge defendant with public urination (see People v. Gomez, 55 Misc 3d 144[A], 2017 NY Slip Op 50641[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2017], lv denied 30 NY3d 980 [2017]). The citation in the accusatory instrument to an incorrect subsection of New York City Administrative de that is, (1) rather than (6) is disregarded as mere surplusage, since the instrument fully advised defendant of the facts relied upon to constitute the alleged violation (see People v. Love, 306 NY 18, 23 [1953]; People v. Hare, 66 Misc 2d 207 [App Term, 1st Dept 1971]; see also People v. Jackson, 128 AD3d 1279 [2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 930 [2015]; People v. Rodriguez, 97 AD3d 246 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 1028 [2014]). THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE court. January 22, THE PEOPLE OF THE State OF NEW YORK, res, v. CARLOS PENA, def-app Judgment of conviction (Alvin M. Yearwood, J.), rendered January 21, 2014, affirmed. The verdict convicting defendant of attempted criminal contempt in the second degree (see Penal Law / [3]) and harassment in the second degree (see Penal Law [1]) was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the court s credibility determinations. There was ample evidence of defendant s guilt, including the testimony of the complainant, defendant s estranged wife, that defendant threatened to kill her, in violation of a valid order of protection, as well as the testimony of a police officer who observed the visibly upset complainant and her children shortly after the incident (see People v. Kaplan, 125 AD3d 465 [2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 1203 [2015]; People v. Delvecchio, 106 AD3d 624 [2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 955 [2013]). THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE court. January 22, THE PEOPLE OF THE State OF NEW YORK, res, v. EDGARDO REYES, def-app Judgment of conviction, (Ann E. Scherzer, J., at plea; Laurie Peterson, J., at sentencing), rendered November 14, 2014, affirmed. Defendant s contention that his plea was not knowing, voluntary and intelligent is unpreserved for appellate review, since defendant did not make a postallocution motion to withdraw his plea or to set aside the judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL (see People v. nceicao, 26 NY3d 375, [2015]; People v. Jackson, 123 AD3d 634 [2014], lv denied 25 NY3d 1202 [2015]) and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Unlike the situation in People v. Tyrell (22 NY3d 359 [2013]), defendant had the opportunity to move to withdraw his plea or otherwise raise the issue and the alleged deficiency did not rise to the level of a mode of proceedings error (see People v. Powell, 134 AD3d 647 [2015], lv denied 27 NY3d 1073 [2016]). As an alternative holding, we find that the plea was knowing, intelligent and voluntary, notwithstanding the absence of a full enumeration of all the rights waived during the course of the allocution (see People v. Sougou, 26 NY3d 1052, 1054 [2015]; People v. Simmons, 138 AD3d 520 [2016], lv denied 27 NY3d 1139 [2016]). In any event, defendant expressly requests that he does not want his plea to be vacated unless we were to dismiss the accusatory instrument based on his completion of his sentence. Since dismissal is not warranted (see People v. nceicao, 26 NY3d at 385 n 1 [2015]; People v. Teron, 139 AD3d 450 [2016]), we affirm on this basis as well (see People v. Diaz, 112 AD3d 423 [2013], lv denied 23 NY3d 1036 [2014]; People v. Schweitzer, 83 AD3d 503 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 800 [2011]). THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE court. January 22, THE PEOPLE OF THE State OF new york, res, v. alvin SparkS, def-app Judgment of conviction, (Laurence E. Busching, J.), rendered December 3, 2015, affirmed. Defendant s guilty plea was knowing, intelligent and voluntary (People v. nceicao, 26 NY3d 375, 382 [2015]; People v. Sougou, 26 NY3d 1052, 1054 [2015]). At the plea proceeding defendant, among other things, waived prosecution by information and formal allocution, admitted his guilt to the offense to which he was pleading, stated that he was pleading guilty freely and voluntarily after consultation with counsel, and that he understood he was giving up his rights to a trial by jury, to remain silent, to call witnesses and to confront the People s witnesses. Thus, the record as a whole establishes defendant s understanding and waiver of his constitutional rights (see Boykin v. Alabama, 395 US 238 [1969]), and nothing in the allocution casts any doubt on the plea s voluntariness. THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE court. January 22, 2018 New York unty First Department SUPREME COURT Justice Nancy M. Bannon American Express Bank v. Taraci (151272/17) See De Silva v. Bd of Mngrs of The Towers (100646/17) Case Shackman v. 400 East 85th St. Rlty. (160778/14) See Justice Lucy Billings Mcurt v. Air & Liquid Systems (190104/14) See Rice v. A.O. Smith Water Prods. (190276/17) See Justice Arlene P. Bluth Celik v Realty (162203/15) See Ajc Plumbing & Heating v. NYC Enviormental (154521/17) Case Bacova v. Paramount Leasehold (154088/16) See Craven v. nyc (100321/17) Case Newby v. NYC mm r. of Human (100723/17) See Santander Bank v. Ame Ame (152781/17) Case Williams v. NYCHA (100573/17) Case Cruceta v. S&L Rlty. (155885/13) See Montalvo v. nyc (100881/17) Case Torres v. 810 Amsterdam (115041/10) See Justice Eileen Bransten Norddeutsche Landesbank v. Tilton (651695/15) See Eddie Sitt v. Sitt (652490/16) See Ameriprise Financial v. Pursino (650544/14) See Petitt v. Lmz Soluble ffee, (652968/15) See Justice David hen Mua v. Berger (155815/17) Justice Matthew F. oper Hardie v. Hardie (307163/16) Justice Melissa Anne Crane mm rs. of The v. Systematic ntrol (452665/15) See Liberty Mutual Ins. v. Sabala (651272/17) See NY Helicopter Charter v. Borneman (153595/16) See Xiang v. All in One Payment Solution (654747/16) Case Devereaux v. Zapata (158082/16) See Levin Individually And on v. Arctic Glacier USA (653648/16) Case Unitrin Advantage Ins. v. Jagdeo (652024/15) See Justice James D Auguste Suarez v. NYC (101137/10) See 7001 East 71st St. v. Maimonides Medical Center (151387/13) See Rivera v. Lutheran Social Services of (452150/15) See Justice Carol R. Edmead Astra Pacific Outdoor v. Jergil Mfg. (655599/16) See n Ed v. Adc nst.. (153190/16) See Engelbert v. Flushing mmons Prop. (162493/15) See McKnight v. Fifth Lenox Terrace (151455/16) See Phillips v. Blue Rio (153508/16) See Alexander v. Unltd. Care (159227/15) See Justice Erika Edwards Can Capital Asset Servicing v. Jpmorgan Chase (156818/17) See Sosnowitz v. Roosevelt Hotel (160737/15) See Bell & v. Benison (151804/15) See Justice Arthur F. Engoron Mediaocean v. Oriole Media D/b/a (655825/16) See Rochon v. Marsh (656238/16) See Justice Kathryn E Freed Madangsui, v. Crystal Properties Llp (160746/16) See Borough of Manhattan v. X (580001/16) See Garcia v. 184th West 10th St. (153436/16) See Katz v. NYC (158762/12) See Krasne v. Gordon (111678/11) See Justice Marcy Friedman Exportaciones Del Futuro v. Authentic Brands Group (655626/16) See Little Rest Twelve, v. Zajic (650209/10) See Mutual Benefits Offshore v. Zeltser (650438/09) Motn Disp. As Ind. Set/ order Rmbs Recovery Hldgs. I v. Syncora Gurantee (652198/17) Case U.S. Bank Nat l Ass n v. Greenpoint Mortgage Funding (600352/09) See Justice Gammerman (JHO) Brown v. Windermere Owners (162601/15) Case Fine v. Windermere Owners (152738/16) Case Justice Paul Allan Goetz Castellar v. Garrido (150152/16) See Basilio v. Adorno (157137/16) See Feimer v. Antonio s Car Service (150990/17) See Perez v. Bersin (161511/14) See Sliman v. Tezanos (154085/14) See Dejesus v. Dutta (155419/16) See Dinai v. Abu Yousaf-Kazi (158301/14) Case Gomez v. Evans (159752/16) Case Kaplan v. Tsirlin (159584/13) See Tsinman v. Wall St. Mail Pick-Up (160217/16) See Justice Shlomo S. Hagler 950 Nostrand v. Hayden Salandy (154238/17) Case Aspire Fed. Credit Union v. Alam (656044/17) Case Center For Independence of v. Metro. (153765/17) See Dongbu v. Dna Bldg. Systems (156839/16) Case Motor Vehicle Accident v. Nakyagaba (451658/17) Case Nationstar Mortgage v. Antoine (850239/14) See NYC Campaign v. Daniel (451043/17) Case Prop. Clerk v. rtez (451336/17) Case Ramos v. 181st Washington Heights (155708/13) Case Ramos v. 181st Washington Heights (155708/13) See Shapiro v. NYC (159570/17) Case Suarez v. Barry s Bootcamp NYC (159666/17) See Justice Sherry K. Heitler Brito v. 163 Broadway (153536/14) See 72nd Tenants v. Venture Toys, (151258/17) Case Mahon v. David Ellis Real Estate (150366/11) See Justice Douglas E. Hoffman Sosa v. Gianiks (305337/16) See Trafelet v. Trafelet (312168/15) See Justice Barbara Jaffe Wells Fargo Bank v. Sheehan (850110/16) See Gomes v. 120/86 Owners (160649/16) See Messer v. United Parcel Service, (151485/17) See American Express Centurion v. Burstein (155074/16) See Delle Donne v. McDonald s (152054/17) Nery Perez v. Rosewood Hldg. (151223/15) Justice Robert Kalish Altman v. Criscione (652460/17) Case Cruz v. Moynihan Station Dev. (159525/14) See Figliacconi v. Abacus Advisor (155229/17) See Torres v. NYC (158489/16) See s continued on next page»

6 26 WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2018 nylj.com urt s New York unty First Department «ntinued from previous page x Hill v. Capsule NYC (150002/17) See Holland v. Feinberg (159238/17) Justice Lynn Kotler American Express Bank v. Leonard (150017/17) Case Justice Gerald Lebovits Na v. Sivin & Miller (101567/14) Case Kowal v. Jackfrombklyn. (156412/15) See Na v. Sivin & Miller (101567/14) See Nicholson v. NYCTA (159891/17) Case NYCTL 2014-A Trust And The v. 119 West 138th St. (153808/15) See Justice Doris Ling-han nroy v. Archdiocese of NY (151047/13) See Justice Joan Madden Schwenner v. Broumand (805292/12) See Justice Andrea Masley Grant v. Serrano (651318/15) Case Hunzinger v. stello (653086/12) See Hunzinger v. Plaid, (652578/12) See Tj Prp v. Rag & Bone Hldgs. (652569/17) See Tj Prp v. Rag & Bone Hldgs. (652571/17) Case Justice Mcmahon, Judith N. Ivette Vasquez v. Beth Israel Medical Center (160701/15) See McWilliams v. Mount Sinai Hosp. (800042/12) See Justice Manuel J. Mendez Harleysville Worcester v. n Ed (151167/16) See Hoskins v. Carter (154341/16) Case Rallo v. Amchem Prod.s, (190206/15) See Wisse v. A.O. Smith Water Prods. (190313/15) See Flood v. Aerco Int l (190147/15) See Medina v Third Ave. Assets II (155699/13) See Justice Peter H. Moulton Mistretta v. Asbestos Ltd (190176/15) Justice Kelly O Neill Levy Katz v. 260 Park Ave. South (155146/13) See Munro v. NYC (158041/12) See Reem ntracting v. Altschul & Altschul (104202/11) See Justice Barry Ostrager Btb Soft, Dba B2b Soft v. Kogan (650671/17) See Buth-Na-Bodhaige, v. Verifone, (656992/17) See Medallion Financial v. Jeffrey Hacking (657378/17) See Justice Eileen Rakower Hodasi v. NY Presbyterian (805424/17) See Moncion v. Jewish Home Lifecare (805328/17) See chrane v. Solomon (805277/16) See Justice Robert R. Reed Mountain Valley Indemnity v. Grutman (156656/16) See Shaw v. Access.1 mmunications (155403/17) Case Shaw v. Access.1 mmunications (155403/17) See Barksdale 32 v. Melamedov (155593/16) See Castlepoint Nat. v. Thomas Crane & Trucking (653840/16) Case Dooley Electric, v. Ibex nst. (651563/17) Motn Disp. As Ind. Set/order Rodriguez v. Markin (650986/17) See Safari Restaurant NYC v. Thor 215 West 116th St. (656854/17) See Williams v. NY Prop. Ins. (151083/14) See 44 Wall v. orate Presence, (652807/17) See Carswell v. Mustaphalli (152156/17) See Phillips Feed Service, v. King Oscar Wootten, (652803/17) Case Genting NY v. Navigators (155825/14) Justice Special Referee Foell v. Bertol (306769/15) Marked Off Justice Saliann Scarpulla Magia, v. Ms USA Hldg. (650232/18) See Sola v. Blue Sky Equities (656470/17) See Justice J. Schecter Gonzalez v. Paramount Group Inc (152557/13) See Halimeh v. B. & R.Dora Int l Dmcc (158519/16) Case Justice O. Peter Sherwood 248 Hospitality Group v. Isidori (654734/17) See 270 Nostrand Lender v. Nnrc Properties (656492/16) Case Shanklin v. Wilhelmina Models, (653702/13) See Taly USA Hldg., v. Jason Nissen (652865/17) See Zurich American Ins. v. Don Buchwald & (655533/16) See Nassau St. v. Nassau Beekman (600991/08) Motn Disp. As Ind. Set/order Falcon Strategic Partners v. Nissen (654865/17) See Justice Martin Shulman Amico v. Leipzig (805407/14) See Cyrus R. Vance v. Doren (451994/17) See Lisi v. Mahal (805327/13) See Justice Silvera, Adam Chalysheva v. Sierra (303471/17) See Justice Lisa Ann Sokoloff Gontarek v. NYCTA (158222/13) See Justice Carmen St. George Knox v. Aronson (158738/16) See Delaney v. 17 State St. (160007/15) See 61 Lex Park Restaurant v. 132 East 61 Rlty.. (162128/15) Case Allstate v. Bunn (160348/14) See Anonymous v. Bernstein (101562/17) Case Anonymous v. Bernstein (101562/17) See Freeman v. Mendy (100105/15) Case Oguma v. Hardwell Acquisitions (153625/12) See Justice A. Tisch Gibbs v. NYC (150665/16) Case Pichardo v. NYC (152788/14) See Dore v. NYC (150158/16) Case Dore v. NYC (150158/16) See Special Referee Hoahng Rodriguez v. NYCTA (112565/08) Disposition of Reference Bronx unty First Department SUPREME COURT Justice M. Brigantti-Hughes Paul v. Port Auth. of NY (25091/14) Denied Justice Joseph E. Capella Minaya v. Lubin (22692/13) on A Default Justice Mitchell J. Danziger - City Bradford v. NYC (27990/17) /ext Villa v. Morgan (21414/12) Brown v. NYC (21904/16) Denied Justice Mitchell Danziger-City Part 33 Estime v. NYC (301719/16) Denied Justice Mitchell J. Danziger - City Govan v. NYC Civil urt (251769/16) Case Justice Mitchell Danziger-City Part 33 Rheubottom v. NYC (28024/17) Case Justice Mitchell J. Danziger - City Spence v. NYC (23110/16) Grant W/o Opposition Bair v. Mabstoa (304762/15) /ext Beloff v. NYC (307416/13) /ext Justice Mitchell Danziger-City Part 33 Bonilla v. NYC (309694/12) Justice Mitchell J. Danziger - City Bradley v. NYCHA (23779/13) Grant W/o Opposition Bradley v. NYCHA (23779/13) Campanali v. NYC (21021/12) Denied W/o Prejudice Duran v. NYC (25727/14) /ext Estrada-Valentin v. NYC (26012/16) Justice Mitchell Danziger-City Part 33 Graham v. NYC (350179/15) Justice Mitchell J. Danziger - City Hines v. Mta (300266/13) /ext Holloway v. NYC (300537/17) Justice Mitchell Danziger-City Part 33 Holmes v. NYC (304099/15) /ext Justice Mitchell J. Danziger - City Hossain v. NYC (30951/17) /ext Matos v. NYC (23173/14) /ext Medrano v. NYCTA (21985/17) Moore v. NYCTA (303457/09) /ext Justice Mitchell Danziger-City Part 33 Morton v. NYC (24062/16) Remove Stay Justice Mitchell J. Danziger - City Perez v. NYC (31832/17) Grant W/o Opposition Quintana v. NYC (301417/16) /ext Rodriguez v. NYC (31734/17) Grant W/o Opposition Vaughn v. NYCTA (302269/16) Grant W/o Opposition Justice Mitchell Danziger-City Part 33 Velez v. NYC (304761/14) /ext Justice Ruben Franco East 158th St. v. Sobo Development (25841/15) Case Justice Doris M. Gonzalez - Stp Brown v. Salvation Army (22013/14) Denied Nunez v. Park Plus Inc (301814/10) Denied Rivera v. El Rey Del Las tinas (302963/14) Denied Chukwuneke v. Tcba Ambulance (302745/11) Denied Davis v. Bldg Beacon Bronx (22555/13) Pd - Decided Justice Laura G. Douglas Bonilla v. Forman Mills, (303990/16) /ext Fraser v. Reclaim Housing Dev. (25439/17) Rendered Giannini v. Leone (24439/17) /ext Isaula v. 690 Gates (23578/17) Kolt v. Maldonado-Ordonez (27585/17) McCutchen v. Fine (23279/17) Moussa v. Pena (303655/16) Rivera v. Yonkers Racing (303974/16) Pd - White v. 856 East 213 St. (27858/16) Rendered Yes v Rlty. (304127/15) Rendered Anthanio v. Bridgewater (27970/16) Astacio v. Kingsbridge Affordable (302929/14) Rendered Brooks v. Williams (303299/15) Rendered Cannon v. NYCHA (27020/16) Center Sheet Metal v. Cannon Design, (309853/08) Rendered Claudio v. Stewart-Bradshaw (25606/16) Rendered Clayton v. Sadik Rugova (23147/15) Cruz-Pelaez v. Jabbie (27642/16) Delacruz v. Faruque (24162/16) Dixon v. Latorre (21312/15) Rendered Famous Formaggio Pizzeria v. Procida nst. (21729/15) Rendered Fuentes v. Union mmunity Health Ctr. (305752/13) Rendered Gallardo v. Plaza -Op City (300905/15) Rendered Harper v. Rosario (26949/15) Rendered Humes v. Samaritan Village Inc (305119/15) Rendered James v. Arbee Mgt. Ltd (303066/14) Rendered McGhee v. NYC Mission (23532/14) Case Morales v Ryer Ave. Rlty. (22938/15) Rendered Newton v. Call-A-Head (22937/16) Rendered O Sullivan v. M & S (302731/15) Rendered Ouelgo v. Alzendani (301434/16) Rendered Reilly v. Jsm I (22030/13) Rendered Rivera v. Boateno (23809/16) Rendered Rodriguez v. Robinson (300590/16) Rendered Smith v. Hill (306324/14) Rendered Williams v. Bp Gas Station (305333/14) Rendered Yeboah v. Lti Trucking (300589/15) Rendered Zambrano v. Voda Rlty. (301166/16) Rendered Justice Lucindo Suarez-mp.Litigation Flores v. 250 E.176 Rlty. (300090/16) Grant W/o Opposition Justice Eddie McShan Nouri v. Urbaez (6742/17) Denied Justice Donald A. Miles Application For urt v. X (31574/17) Case Justice Julia Rodriguez untry-wide Ins. v. Foster (25949/17) Case Justice Howard E. Sherman Wright v. Stewart (26576/17) Jordan v. Jordan (26454/17) Case Wells Fargo Bank v. Browne (380296/13) Pd - Denied Justice Lucindo Suarez U.S. Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Spencer (380269/13) /ext Fed. Nat. Mortgage v. Obi (32669/16) Case Greenpoint Mortgage Funding v. Liga (380595/07) Pd - Hsbc Bank USA v. Borromeo (381178/10) Pd - Justice Fernando Tapia Espinal v. Donatone (20517/15) Appellate Division Second Department List released on: January 22, 2018 By Priscilla Hall, J.P.; Sgroi, hen and nnolly, JJ. Paul KANDEL plf, v. FN; Taxi;, etc., et al., def, Brickman Group, Ltd.,, res, PORT Authority of New York and New Jersey, ap (Action No. 1) ROBERT FLAVORS plf, v. FN; Taxi;, etc., et al., def, Brickman Group, Ltd.,, res, PORT Authority of New York and New Jersey, ap (Action No. 2) by the respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated June 28, 2017, on the ground that the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated upon entry of a judgment of the same court in the above-entitled action dated September 12, opposition ORDERED that on the urt s own motion, the notice of appeal from the order is deemed also to be a notice of appeal from the judgment (see CPLR 5501[c]); ORDERED that the motion is held in abeyance and referred to the panel of Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof. HALL, J.P., SGROI, COHEN and CON- NOLLY, JJ., concur. By Priscilla Hall, J.P.; Sgroi, hen and nnolly, JJ. U.S. Bank NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, etc., plaintiff- res, v. Alphonso Giraldo, ap, MORTGAGE Electronic REGISTRATION Systems,, etc., def-res by the plaintiff-respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Nassau unty, entered April 28, 2017, on the ground that the appellant is not aggrieved. opposition ORDERED that the motion is held in abeyance and referred to the panel of Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof. HALL, J.P., SGROI, COHEN and CON- NOLLY, JJ., concur. By Dillon, J.P.; hen, Duffy and nnolly, JJ. John A. Trulio, Jr., res-ap, v. Village of Ossining, appellant-res by the respondent-appellant on an appeal and a cross appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Westchester unty, dated October 15, 2015, which was determined by decision and order of this urt dated August 2, 2017, for leave to reargue stated portions of the appeal. Separate motion by the respondent-appellant for leave to reargue so much of the decision and order of this urt dated August 2, 2017, as awarded costs to the appellant-respondent. of the motions and the papers filed in opposition ORDERED that the motions are denied, with $100 costs. DILLON, J.P., COHEN, DUFFY and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Leventhal, Hinds- Radix and Maltese, JJ. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., res, v. Jose B. Illescas ap, et al., def by the respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Westchester unty, dated April 15, 2016, on the ground that no appeal lies from an order entered upon the default of the appealing party. of the motion and no papers having ORDERED that the motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see CPLR 5511). BALKIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, HINDS- RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur. By Dillon, J.P.; Miller, Barros and Christopher, JJ. Board of Managers of Village Mall At Hillcrest ndominium, res, v. Sunil Banerjee, et al., ap Appeals from an order of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, dated December 22, By order to show cause dated October 20, 2017, the parties were directed to show cause before this urt why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal insofar as taken by Sunil Banerjee on the ground that the notice of appeal dated January 23, 2017, was filed in violation of the statutory stay of proceedings which arose upon his death, on January 3, 2017, and that the attorney who filed the notice of appeal lacked authority to act on behalf of the deceased. Now, upon the order to show cause and the papers filed in response ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal purportedly taken by Sunil Banerjee is granted, and the appeal purportedly taken by Sunil Banerjee is dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see CPLR 1015[a]; JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Rosemberg, 90 AD3d 713; Lewis v. Kessler, 12 Ad3d 421, 422). DILLON, J.P., MILLER, BARROS and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Leventhal, Hinds- Radix and Maltese, JJ. Theresa Maddalena, etc. ap, v. BRADLEY GOLDEN res by the respondents to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Westchester unty, dated October 6, 2016, for failure to timely perfect. of the motion and no papers having ORDERED that the motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[e]). BALKIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, HINDS- RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Leventhal, Hinds- Radix and Maltese, JJ. US. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, etc., res, v. MARY v. Tropeano, appellants def by the respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Suffolk unty, dated January 26, 2017, for failure to timely perfect. of the motion and no papers having ORDERED that the motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[e]). BALKIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, HINDS- RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur. By Chambers, J.P.; Sgroi, Hinds- Radix and Iannacci, JJ. Karen FLYNN, etc., ap, v. Hometown Taxi,, def, Public ADMINISTRATOR of the unty of Suffolk, etc., res Appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Suffolk unty, dated July 27, By order to show cause dated November 16, 2017, the parties were directed to show cause before this urt why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled action on the grounds that, inter alia, the parties identified as the appellants in the notice of appeal are not aggrieved by the order dated July 27, Application to withdraw the appeal. Now, upon the order to show cause and the papers filed in response thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation granted and the appeal is deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements; ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied as academic. CHAMBERS, J.P., SGROI, HINDS- RADIX and IANNACCI, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Leventhal, Hinds- Radix and Maltese, JJ. CATHERINE Marchello, etc., res, v. PERFECT LITTLE PRODUCTIONS,, et al., ap Application by the appellants on an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Nassau unty, entered February 4, 2016, in effect, to substitute Stephen Craig Young, as personal representative of the estate of Valeria Valente Young, for the deceased appellant Valeria Valente Young, sued herein as Mrs. Steve Young, a/k/a Valerie Valente, to amend the caption accordingly, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal. The appellant Valeria Valente Young, sued herein as Mrs. Steve Young, a/k/a Valerie Valente, died on August 17, By order to show cause dated October 20, 2017, the branches of the application which were for substitution and to amend the caption were granted, the parties were directed to show cause before this urt why an order should or should not be made and entered (1) dismissing the appeal on the grounds that the notice of appeal was filed in violation of the statutory stay of proceedings which arose upon the death of Valeria Valente Young, sued herein as Mrs. Steve Young, a/k/a Valerie Valente, and (2) vacating the order entered February 4, 2016, as a nullity, and the branch of the application which was to enlarge the appellants time to perfect the appeal was held in abeyance in the interim. Now, upon the order to show cause and no papers having been filed in response thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal and vacate the order is granted, and the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see CPLR 1015[a]; JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Rosemberg, 90 AD3d 713) and the order entered February 4, 2016, is vacated as a nullity (see CPLR 1015; Matter of Einstoss, 26 NY2d 181); and it is further, ORDERED that the branch of the application which is to enlarge the appellants time to perfect the appeal is denied as academic. BALKIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, HINDS- RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur. By Mastro, J.P.; Sgroi, Hinds-Radix and Iannacci, JJ. PEOPLE, res, v. Ramon Lopez, ap by the appellant s assigned counsel on an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated August 3, 2016, in effect, to be relieved on the ground that the appellant has absconded and is not presently available to obey the mandate of the urt. relation ORDERED that the motion is dismissed without prejudice to renew upon proper papers, including proof of service upon the appellant at his last known place of residence (see CPL [2]). MASTRO, J.P., SGROI, HINDS-RADIX and IANNACCI, JJ., concur. By Priscilla Hall, J.P.; Roman, hen and Barros, JJ. PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Muhammad Abdallah, ap by the respondent for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, dated August 21, 2015, which was determined by decision and order of this urt dated September 27, opposition ORDERED that the motion is denied. HALL, J.P., ROMAN, COHEN and BARROS, JJ., concur. By Mastro, J.P.; Leventhal, Austin and Roman, JJ. MATTER of Bonefish Grill,, respondent- ap, v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Village of Rockville Centre, appellant-res by the respondent-appellant for leave to reargue appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme urt, Nassau unty, dated March 10, 2015, and three orders of the same court dated October 30, 2014, December 23, 2014, and February 23, 2015, respectively, and cross appeals from the order and judgment and the order dated February 23, 2015, which were determined by decision and order of this urt dated September 27, 2017, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the urt of Appeals from the decision and order of this urt. opposition ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs. MASTRO, J.P., LEVENTHAL, AUSTIN and ROMAN, JJ., concur. By Chambers, J.P.; Sgroi, Hinds- Radix and Iannacci, JJ. Karen FLYNN, etc., ap, v. Strickly Suffolk,, res Appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Suffolk unty, dated July 27, By order to show cause dated November 16, 2017, the parties were directed to show cause before this urt why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled action on the grounds that, inter alia, the parties identified as the appellants in the notice of appeal are not aggrieved by the order dated July 27, Application to withdraw the appeal. Now, upon the order to show cause and the papers filed in response thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation granted and the appeal is deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements; ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied as academic. CHAMBERS, J.P., SGROI, HINDS- RADIX and IANNACCI, JJ., concur. By Dillon, J.P.; Leventhal, nnolly and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ. Asher Ganach, etc., ap, v. CHARLES MILLOUL res by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated August 9, 2016, and a judgment of the same court entered July 11, 2017, and to consolidate the appeals. opposition ORDERED that on the urt s own motion, the appeal from the order is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, on the ground that the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated upon entry of the judgment (see Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241); the issues raised on the appeal from the order are brought up for review and may be raised on the appeal from the judgment; ORDERED that the motion is granted to the extent that the appellant s time to perfect the appeal from the judgment is enlarged until March 12, 2018, and the motion is otherwise denied as academic. DILLON, J.P., LEVENTHAL, CON- NOLLY and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur. By Chambers, J.P.; Miller, Barros and nnolly, JJ. Andrew DESERTO, Jr., res, v. Goshen Central School District ap by the appellants for leave to appeal to the urt of Appeals from a decision and order of this urt dated August 9, 2017, which determined an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Orange unty, dated April 27, opposition ORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellants time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until May 11, 2016, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date. CHAMBERS, J.P., MILLER, BARROS and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur. By Leventhal, J.P.; Austin, Miller and Duffy, JJ. PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Glenford Nickey, ap by the appellant, in effect, to restore to active status an appeal from a resentence of the Supreme urt, Westchester unty, imposed April 27, 2011, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal. of the motion and no papers having ORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellant s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged, and the appellant shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this urt s rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions. LEVENTHAL, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and DUFFY, JJ., concur. By Chambers, J.P.; Miller, Hinds- Radix and Lasalle, JJ. ALBERT Michael, res, v. He Gin Lee Architect Planner, P ap by the respondent for leave to reargue an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, entered April 16, 2015, which was determined by decision and order of this urt dated August 16, 2017, or, in the alternative, for leave to

7 appeal to the urt of Appeals from the decision and order of this urt. opposition ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs. CHAMBERS, J.P., MILLER, HINDS- RADIX and LASALLE, JJ., concur. By Leventhal, J.P.; Chambers, Miller and Duffy, JJ. Mathew Abraham res, v. American Gardens COMPANy,, et al., ap by the appellants to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Westchester unty, entered January 20, opposition ORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellants time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 21, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted. LEVENTHAL, J.P., CHAMBERS, MILLER and DUFFY, JJ., concur. By Leventhal, J.P.; Chambers, Miller and Duffy, JJ. Angella J. Pusey, ap, v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., res by the appellant pro se on an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, entered January 24, 2017, to waive compliance with the requirements of 22 NYCRR (f) regarding certification of the record on appeal. of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition ORDERED that the motion is granted. LEVENTHAL, J.P., CHAMBERS, MILLER and DUFFY, JJ., concur. By Dillon, J.P.; Leventhal, nnolly and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ. MATTER of Michael J. Tropp, etc. res, v. City of New York Environmental ntrol Board ap MATTER of Michael J. Tropp, etc., respondents, v. City of New York Environmental ntrol Board appellants. (Index No /14) by the appellants to consolidate appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) and a judgment of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, both dated June 20, 2016, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeals. relation ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to consolidate the appeals is denied; ORDERED that on the urt s own motion, the appeals will be calendared together and will be argued or submitted on the same date; ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to perfect the appeals is granted, and the time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until February 21, DILLON, J.P., LEVENTHAL, CON- NOLLY and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur. By Roman, J.P.; hen, Miller and Barros, JJ. MATTER of Lola Linder, deceased. Anthony A. Caracciolo, petitioner-res, Alecia Ingber, res-res (File No. 4686/93) by the appellant for leave to appeal to the urt of Appeals from a decision and order of this urt dated September 20, 2017, which determined an appeal from an order of the Surrogate s urt, Kings unty, dated June 30, opposition ORDERED that the motion is denied. ROMAN, J.P., COHEN, MILLER and BARROS, JJ., concur. By Mastro, J.P.; Rivera, Hall and Maltese, JJ. MATTER of London Leasing Limited Partnership, ap, v. Division of Housing and mmunity Renewal, res by the appellant for leave to reargue an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, entered July 7, 2015, which was determined by decision and order of this urt dated August 16, 2017, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the urt of Appeals from the decision and order of this urt. opposition ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs. MASTRO, J.P., RIVERA, HALL and MALTESE, JJ., concur. By Priscilla Hall, J.P.; Roman, hen and Barros, JJ. MATTER of Fred C. Dicker, ap, v. Glen Oaks Village Owners, res by the respondent Glen Oaks Village Owners,, for leave to reargue an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, entered June 28, 2016, which was determined by decision and order of this urt dated September 27, 2017, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the urt of Appeals from the decision and order of this urt. opposition ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs. HALL, J.P., ROMAN, COHEN and BARROS, JJ., concur. By Dillon, J.P.; Leventhal, nnolly and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ. Veeramuth P. Gounder, plf, v. mmunicar, def (Appellate Term Docket No QC; Civil urt Index No. CV92419/11) by Veeramuth P. Gounder for leave to appeal to this urt from an order of the Appellate Term, Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts, dated May 17, 2017, which affirmed an order of the Civil urt of the City of New York, Queens unty, entered December 17, opposition ORDERED that the motion is denied. DILLON, J.P., LEVENTHAL, CON- NOLLY and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur. By Chambers, J.P.; Austin, Roman and Barros, JJ. SJSJ Southold Realty,, ap, v. Elizabeth Fraser, etc. res by the appellant for leave to reargue appeals from an order of the Supreme urt, Suffolk unty, dated July 30, 2015, and a judgment of the same court entered October 2, 2015, which were determined by decision and order of this urt dated May 10, 2017, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the urt of Appeals from the decision and order of this urt. opposition ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs. CHAMBERS, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN and BARROS, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Austin, Roman and Sgroi, JJ. PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Eric Dancy, ap by the appellant to deem a decision and order on motion of this urt dated October 6, 2016, which granted the appellant s motion pursuant to CPL for an extension of time to take an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, rendered October 9, 2015, under Indictment No. 4311/13, subsequently designated as Indictment No. 4311/13A, to also grant relief with respect to an appeal from a judgment of the same court also rendered October 9, 2015, under Indictment No. 4737/13, subsequently designated as Indictment No. 4311/13B, and to deem a decision and order on motion of this urt dated December 5, 2016, which granted poor person relief and the assignment of counsel with respect to the appeal from the judgment under Indictment No. 4311/13, subsequently designated as Indictment No. 4311/13A, to also grant poor person relief and the assignment of counsel with respect to the appeal from the judgment under Indictment No. 4737/13, subsequently designated as Indictment No. 4311/13B. relation ORDERED that the motion is granted and the decisions and orders on motion of this urt dated October 6, 2016, and December 5, 2016, are deemed to reflect that leave to file a late notice of appeal, poor person relief, and the assignment of counsel are also granted with respect to the appeal from the judgment under Indictment No. 4737/13, subsequently designated as Indictment No. 4311/13B. BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN and SGROI, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Austin, Roman and Sgroi, JJ. JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, res, v. Stephanie Fritzhand, et al., ap by the respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Nassau unty, entered September 27, 2016, for failure to timely perfect. Application by the appellants to withdraw the appeal. of the motion and no papers having thereto, and upon the stipulation of the attorneys for the respective parties to the appeal dated December 5, 2017, it is granted and the appeal is deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements; ORDERED that the motion is denied as academic. BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN and SGROI, JJ., concur. By Leventhal, J.P.; Sgroi, Miller and Maltese, JJ. MATTER of Frank A. Lee, deceased. Brenda Van der Mije petitioners- appellants; Bank of New York Mellon, et al., res-res (Proceeding No. 1) (File No /I) MATTER of Jane E. Lee, deceased. Brenda Van der Mije petitioners- appellants; Bank of New York Mellon, et al., resres (Proceeding Nos. 2-4) (File Nos /F, /B, /B) by the petitioners-appellants for leave to reargue appeals from four decrees of the Surrogate s urt, Nassau unty, three dated December 19, 2014, and one dated December 24, 2014, which were determined by decision and order of this urt dated August 23, opposition ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs. LEVENTHAL, J.P., SGROI, MILLER and MALTESE, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Austin, Roman and Sgroi, JJ. Olga Vernigora, etc. res, v. Rimma Gelbert, etc. ap Separate motions by the appellant Rimma Gelbert, the appellant Reuven Moshenyat, the appellants John Rigney and Urban Radiology, P.C., and the appellant Jeffrey N. Lang, to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated August 18, of the motions and no papers having ORDERED that the motions are granted, the appellants time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until February 20, 2018, and the joint record or appendix on the appeals and the appellants respective briefs shall be served and filed on or before that date; ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted. BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN and SGROI, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Austin, Roman and Sgroi, JJ. Sang Seok Na, ap, v. Paul H. Schietroma, etc. res by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, entered September 21, of the motion and no papers having ORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellant s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 20, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted. BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN and SGROI, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Austin, Roman and Sgroi, JJ. P.B. #7,, res, v. 231 Fourth Avenue Lyceum, def, Eric Richmond, ap by the respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated June 13, of the motion and no papers having ORDERED that the motion is granted, the respondent s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 22, 2018, and the respondent s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted. BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN and SGROI, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Austin, Roman and Sgroi, JJ. Cenlar (FSB), res, v. Isaac Tenenbaum ap by the respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated June 29, of the motion and no papers having ORDERED that the motion is granted, the respondent s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 20, 2018, and the respondent s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted. BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN and SGROI, JJ., concur. Matter of Alan Belsky ap, v. ROBERt LAGA res, Jay MOSkowitz res-res Application by the appellants 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 urt, Putnam unty, dated June 30, of the application and no papers having granted, the appellants time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 14, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants brief shall be served and filed on or before that date. MATTER of Edward Wydra res, v. Mendel Brach appellants; Marcy Towers, intervenors. Separate applications by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, entered March 23, of the applications and the papers filed in opposition ORDERED that the applications are granted, the appellants time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until February 1, 2018, and the joint record or appendix on the appeals and the appellants respective briefs shall be served and filed on or before that date. By Rivera, J.P.; Miller, Nelson and Miller, JJ. GIUSEPPA Gullo, plf-res, v. City of New York def, Metropolitan Authority, et al., def-res, Verizon New York,, ap by the plaintiffrespondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated June 30, of the motion and no papers having ORDERED that the motion is granted, the plaintiff-respondent s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the plaintiffrespondent s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further, ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted. RIVERA, J.P., MILLER, BRATHWAITE NELSON and IANNACCI, JJ., concur. By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ. Todd RUFFALO, ap, v. Franzoso ntracting,, et al., res Appeal by Todd Ruffalo from an unsigned transcript of the Supreme urt, Westchester unty, dated August 29, On the urt s own motion, it is ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, on the ground that no appeal lies from an unsigned transcript (see Ojeda v. Metropolitan Playhouse,, 120 AD2d 717). SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVE- RA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur. MATTER of Ilda Lliguicota, res, v. Cesar CALVA, ap Appeal by Cesar Calva from an order of the Family urt, Kings unty, dated November 17, By decision and order on certification of this urt dated December 29, 2017, the following attorney was assigned as counsel for the appellant on the appeal: Francine Shraga, Esq. 869 East 12th Street Brooklyn, Ny By letter dated January 15, 2018, the assigned counsel has informed this urt that the appellant wishes to proceed with the appeal. Pursuant to 670.4(a) of the rules of this urt (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 urt, and the assigned counsel shall notify this urt by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this ; ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this, the assigned counsel shall file in the office of the Clerk of this urt one of the following: (1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of any Family urt proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or (2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation stating that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date received; or (3) if the transcripts has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that the order on certification of this urt dated December 29, 2017, has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken, 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, the Clerk of this urt shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed. By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ. MATTER of Kwaku Quartey, petitioner- ap, v. Latanya Genise Van Buren, res, Kamiya-Lynn Q. (Anonymous), NONPARty-ap (Proceeding No. 1) MATTER of Latanya Genise Van Buren, res, v. Kwaku Quartey, respondent- appellant; Kamiya- Lynn Q. (Anonymous), NONPARtyap (Proceeding No. 2) Appeal by Kwaku Quartey, and separate appeal by Kamiya-Lynn Q., from an order of the Family urt, Kings unty, dated September 8, Pursuant to Family urt Act 1118 and 1120, and upon the certification of Francine Shraga, Esq., dated January 12, 2018, it is ORDERED that the respondent is granted leave to proceed as a poor person on the appeals, and the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to respond to the appeals: Salvatore C. Adamo, Esq. 350 Fifth Avenue, 59th Floor New York, NY ORDERED that assigned counsel shall promptly attempt to contact the respondent at the address provided by the urt, and shall notify the Case Manager assigned to the appeals on or before February 5, 2018, in writing, that he has done so and that either (1) the respondent is interested in responding to the appeals, or (2) the respondent is not interested in responding to the appeals, or that he has been unable to contact the respondent, and wishes to be relieved of the assignment. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVE- RA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur. MATTER of ANDREw E. (ANONy- MOUS) II, ap, v. ANGELA N. S. (ANONymous), respondent Appeal by Andrew E. from an order of the Family urt, Queens unty, dated November 9, By decision and order on certification of this urt dated January 8, 2018, the following attorney was assigned as counsel for the appellant on the appeal: Larry S. Bachner, Esq. 39 Broadway, Suite 1610 New York, NY By letter dated January 16, 2018, the assigned counsel has informed this urt that the appellant wishes to proceed with the appeal. Pursuant to 670.4(a) of the rules of this urt (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 urt, and the assigned counsel shall notify this urt by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this ; ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this, the assigned counsel shall file in the office of the Clerk of this urt one of the following: (1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of any Family urt proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or (2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation stating that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date received; or (3) if the transcripts has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that the order on certification of this urt dated January 8, 2018, has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken, 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, the Clerk of this urt shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed. By Scheinkman, P.J.; Rivera, Dillon, Balkin and Chambers, JJ. MATTER of Quinton Carr, appellant-res, v. Armani Thomas, res-res Appeal by Quinton Carr, and cross appeal by Armani Thomas, from an order of the Family urt, Queens unty, dated November 30, Pursuant to Family urt Act 1118 and 1120, and upon the certification of Daniel E. Lubetsky, Esq., dated January 16, 2018, it is ORDERED that the appellant-respondent is granted leave to proceed as a poor person and the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal: Daniel E. Lubetsky, Esq Jamaica Avenue Jamaica, NY (718) ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the briefs of the appellant-respondent, the respondentappellant, and the attorney for the child 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); 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 urt, and the clerk of the Family urt shall furnish one of such certified transcripts to the appellant s assigned counsel, without charge; in the case of transcription services, one transcript shall be filed with the clerk of the Family urt and one transcript shall be delivered to the assigned counsel. Assigned counsel is directed to provide copies of said transcripts to all of the other parties to the appeal and cross appeal, including the attorney for the child, if any, when counsel serves the appellant s brief upon those parties; ORDERED that assigned counsel shall serve a copy of this order upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal and cross appeal are taken; 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 urt, and the assigned counsel shall notify this urt by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this order; ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this order, the assigned counsel shall file in the office of the Clerk of this urt one of the following: (1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of any Family urt proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal and cross appeal; or (2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation stating 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 this order has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal and cross appeal are 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, the Clerk of this urt shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., RIVERA, DILLON, BALKIN and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur. By Leventhal, J.P.; hen, Maltese and Barros, JJ. HSBC Bank USA, National AssociatION, etc., ap, v. ANDREw ParkER def, 43 Monroe,, res by the appellant to stay the sale or encumbrance of the subject premises, pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated October 19, 2017, and pursuant to CPLR 5518, 6501, 6511, and 6513 to amend and extend the duration of the notice of pendency for a period of three years. opposition ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to stay the sale or encumbrance of the subject premises is granted and the sale or encumbrance of the subject premises, located at 43 Monroe Street, Brooklyn, NY, is stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal; and it is further, ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied. LEVENTHAL, J.P., COHEN, MALTESE and BARROS, JJ., concur. By Scheinkman, P.J.; Rivera, Dillon, Balkin and Chambers, JJ. MATTER of Joseph H. (Anonymous), ap, v. Westchester unty DEPARtment of Social SERVICES, on behalf of Ayisha M. (Anonymous), res Appeal by Joseph H. from an order of the Family urt, Westchester unty, dated October 25, Pursuant to Family urt Act 1118 and 1120, and upon the certification of Trevor Eisenman, Esq., it is ORDERED that the appellant is granted leave to proceed as a poor person on the appeal and the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal: Trevor Eisenman, PC 180 S. Broadway, Suite 302 White Plains, NY ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the briefs of the appellant, the respondent, and the attorney for the child, 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); 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 urt, and the clerk of the Family urt shall furnish one of such certified transcripts to the appellant s assigned counsel, without charge; in the case of transcription services, one transcript shall be filed with the clerk of the Family urt and one transcript shall be delivered to the assigned counsel. Assigned counsel is directed to provide copies of said transcripts to all of the other parties to the appeal, including the attorney for the child, if any, when counsel serves the appellant s brief upon those parties; ORDERED that assigned counsel shall serve a copy of this order upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken; 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 urt, and the assigned counsel shall notify this urt by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this order; ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this order, the assigned counsel shall file in the office of the Clerk of this urt one of the following: (1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of any Family urt proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or (2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation stating 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 this order 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, the Clerk of this urt shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., RIVERA, DILLON, BALKIN and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur. By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ. MATTER of Jonah B. (Anonymous). Administration of Childrens SERVICES, petitioner-res, RIVA v. (Anonymous), respondentappellant res (Proceeding No. 1) MATTER of Adele S. (Anonymous). Administration of Childrens SERVICES, petitioner-res, RIVA v. (Anonymous), respondentappellant res (Proceeding No. 2) MATTER of talia Benyaminova S. (Anonymous). Administration of Childrens SERVICES, petitioner-res, RIVA v. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant res (Proceeding No. 3) Appeal by Riva V. from an order of the Family urt, Queens unty, dated November 9, Pursuant to 670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this urt (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is ORDERED that the time for the attorney for the children to serve and file a brief on the appeal is enlarged until February 20, 2018; ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVE- RA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur. MATTER of Krishna K. Snowden, res, v. Curtis D. Snowden, ap Appeal by Curtis D. Snowden from an order of the Family urt, Suffolk unty, dated March 24, Pursuant to 670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this urt (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is ORDERED that the time for the respondent to serve and file a brief on the appeal is enlarged until February 16, Hyon Chu Kim, ap, v. Anthony DENICker res Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 30-day enlargement of time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, dated April 18, of the application and no papers having granted to the extent that the appellant s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until February 13, 2018, the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied. By Rivera, J.P.; Austin, nnolly and Lasalle, JJ. PEOPLE, etc., res, v. tracy R. Watkins, ap by the appellant pro se pursuant to CPL for an s continued on next page» WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, nylj.com

8 extension of time to take an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Suffolk unty, rendered October 28, 2016, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel. opposition ORDERED that the motion is granted; ORDERED that the appellant s moving papers are deemed to constitute a timely notice of appeal; 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; 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); 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; 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 ); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant s brief on the respondent; 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; ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order on motion 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 appellant s sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the appellant which are incorporated in or referred to in the report, and to provide additional copies to this urt upon demand; 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 urt and the District s office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; ORDERED that pursuant to unty Law 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal: Laurette Mulry, Esq. Legal Aid Society of Suffolk unty- Appeals Bureau 300 Center Drive PO Box 1697, New York ORDERED that the appellant s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this urt s rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his or her 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 decision and order on motion upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken. RIVERA, J.P., AUSTIN, CONNOLLY and IANNACCI, JJ., concur. MATTER of Symphani F. G. (Anonymous). ADMINISTRATION for Childrens SERVICES, petitionerres, Otis G. (Anonymous), res-res Appeals by Otis G. from two orders of the Family urt, Queens unty, dated November 17, 2016, and May 30, 2017, respectively. Pursuant to 670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this urt (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is ORDERED that the time for the petitioner-respondent to serve and file a brief on the appeals is enlarged until February 20, By Rivera, J.P.; Austin, nnolly and Iannacci, JJ. PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Herbie T. White, ap Renewed motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the unty urt, Suffolk unty, rendered April 18, 2017, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel. relation ORDERED that the motion is granted; 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; 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); 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; 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 ); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant s brief on the respondent; 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; ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order on motion 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 appellant s sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the appellant which are incorporated in or referred to in the report, and to provide additional copies to this urt upon demand; 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 urt and the District s office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; ORDERED that pursuant to unty Law 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal: Laurette Mulry, Esq. Legal Aid Society of Suffolk unty- Appeals Bureau 300 Center Drive PO Box 1697, New York ORDERED that the appellant s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this urt s rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his or her 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 decision and order on motion upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken. RIVERA, J.P., AUSTIN, CONNOLLY and IANNACCI, JJ., concur. MATTER of D. (Anonymous). Elizabeth P. (Anonymous), petitioner-res, Darren M. (Anonymous), res-ap, Juan P. (Anonymous), res-res Appeal by Darren M. from an order of the Family urt, Dutchess unty, dated July 7, The appellant s brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this urt on January 12, Pursuant to 670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this urt (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is ORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this order, the briefs for the respondents and the attorney for the child in the above-entitled appeal shall be served and filed. By Maltese, J. PEOPLE, etc., plf, v. Thomas Smith, def Application by the defendant pursuant to CPL and for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this urt from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated October 10, 2017, which has been referred to me for determination. of the application and the papers filed in opposition denied. MATTER of Karla Alonso, res, v. Sharod Perdue, ap Appeal by Sharod Perdue from an order of the Family urt, Queens unty, dated March 3, The appellant s brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this urt on January 12, Pursuant to 670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this urt (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is ORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this order, the briefs for the respondent and the attorney for the child in the above-entitled appeal shall be served and filed. By Dillon, J.P.; Hinds-Radix, Maltese and Lasalle, JJ. PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Leon E. SCOTT, ap by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the unty urt, Dutchess unty, rendered September 15, 2017, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel. relation ORDERED that the motion is granted; 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; 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); 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; 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 ); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant s brief on the respondent; 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; ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order on motion 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 appellant s sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the appellant which are incorporated in or referred to in the report, and to provide additional copies to this urt upon demand; 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 urt and the District s office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; ORDERED that pursuant to unty Law 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal: Thomas N. N. Angell, Esq. Dutchess unty Public Defender 22 Market Street Poughkeepsie, New York ORDERED that the appellant s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this urt s rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his or her 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 decision and order on motion upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken. DILLON, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, MAL- TESE and LASALLE, JJ., concur. By Hinds-Radix, J. PEOPLE, etc., plf, v. Rahjon MORROW, def Application by the defendant pursuant to CPL and for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this urt from an order of the Supreme urt, Nassau unty, dated September 19, 2016, which has been referred to me for determination. of the application and the papers filed in opposition denied. Premium rnerstone Properties,, ap, v. S&R Main REALTY, res Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d) (2) for a 90-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Westchester unty, dated June 29, of the application and the papers filed in opposition granted to the extent that the appellant s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 28, 2018, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied. MATTER of Scott Mitchell Unger, ap, v. Koren Ha, res (Proceeding No. 1) MATTER of Koren Ha, res, v. Scott Mitchell Unger, ap (Proceeding No. 2) Appeal by Scott Mitchell Unger from an order of the Family urt, Nassau unty, dated October 23, Pursuant to 670.4(a) of the rules of this urt (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 urt, and the appellant shall notify this urt by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this ; ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this urt one of the following: (1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family urt 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) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further, ORDERED that if none of the actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above has been taken within 30 days of the date of this, the Clerk of this urt shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed. Thea KELLY, ap, v. Double Down NYC,, etc., res Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until March 9, 2018, to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated March 20, of the application and no papers having granted to the extent that the appellant s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 9, 2018, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied. By Dillon, J.P.; Hinds-Radix, Maltese and Lasalle, JJ. PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Stephen M. Bai, ap by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the unty urt, Dutchess unty, rendered June 29, 2017, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel. relation ORDERED that the motion is granted; 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; 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); 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; 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 ); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant s brief on the respondent; 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; ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order on motion 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 appellant s sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the appellant which are incorporated in or referred to in the report, and to provide additional copies to this urt upon demand; 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 urt and the District s office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; ORDERED that pursuant to unty Law 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal: Thomas N. N. Angell, Esq. Dutchess unty Public Defender 22 Market Street Poughkeepsie, New York ORDERED that the appellant s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this urt s rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his or her 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 decision and order on motion upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVE- RA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur. Edwin lon, ap, v. New York Mercantile Exchange, res, Verizon New York,, et al., defendants third-party plaintiffs; S.E.B. SERVICES of New York,, third- PARTY def-ap, CushMAN & Wakefield,, third-party defendant- res Application pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated June 5, of the application and no papers having granted, the appellants time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until April 11, 2018, the record or appendix on the appeals and the appellants respective briefs shall be served and filed on or before that date. By Maltese, J. PEOPLE, etc., plf, v. Thomas Smith, def Application by the defendant pursuant to CPL and for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this urt from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated July 19, 2017, which has been referred to me for determination. of the application and the papers filed in opposition denied. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE,, res, v. Ryan Ramnarine, appellant def Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until April 20, 2018, to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, dated April 21, of the application and the papers filed in opposition granted to the extent that the appellant s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 21, 2018, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied. Menachem farro, etc., appellant-res, v. Zalman Schochet, etc. respondents- ap Application by the respondents-appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated August 18, of the application and the papers filed in opposition and in relation granted, the applicants time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 28, 2018, the applicants brief shall be served and filed on or before that date. A.N., etc. ap, v. Roman CATholic Diocese of Rockville Centre, et al., res 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 urt, Suffolk unty, dated April 14, of the application and no papers having granted, the respondents time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 6, 2018, and the respondents brief shall be served and filed on or before that date. MATTER of Leah Fruchthandler, res, v. Ephraim Fruchthandler, ap Appeals by Ephraim Fruchthandler from two orders of the Family urt, Kings unty, dated July 21, 2017, and July 24, 2017, respectively. The appellant s brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this urt on January 16, Pursuant to 670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this urt (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is ORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this order, the brief for the respondent in the above-entitled appeal shall be served and filed. CITIMORTGAGE,, res, v. Marion Haupt def, Patricia A. Kuenecke ap Application by the appellants to withdraw appeals from two orders of the Supreme urt, Suffolk unty, both dated October 25, of the application and no papers having granted and the appeals are marked withdrawn. Elaina Tudor, res, v. George Tudorovic, ap Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated April 4, of the application and no papers having granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn. By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ Hempstead,, appellant-res, v. 182 St., def, ThELMA Treasure respondents-ap Application by the respondents-appellants on an appeal and a cross appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, dated January 23, 2017, for leave to withdraw the cross appeal. of the application and no papers having ORDERED that the application is granted and the cross appeal is deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVE- RA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur. By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ. YESSENIA GARCIA, plf-res, v. City of White Plains, ap, Swift Distribution,, etc., defendant- res Application to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Westchester unty, dated January 23, Upon the stipulation of the attorneys for the respective parties to the appeal dated January 8, 2018, it is granted and the appeal is deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVE- RA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur. MATTER of A. F. (Anonymous), res, v. K. H. (Anonymous), ap Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Family urt, Rockland unty, dated May 25, of the application and no papers having granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn. MATTER of Joseph Sebro, deceased. Adriana Carrera, petitioner-res, Denise Reyes- Marcano, respondent-res, Am Pacific,., NONPARTY-ap (File No. 1855/15) Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Surrogate s urt, Kings unty, dated July 10, of the application and no papers having granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn. MORTGAGE Electronic Registration Systems, etc., ap, v. Luis Tomala, Sr. res, Tariq Hussain, def Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, dated August 15, of the application and no papers having granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn. Cranston Kowlessar, ap, v. KWAME DARKWAh res Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Queens unty, dated March 29, of the application and no papers having granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn. By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ. Joseph Ingallinella plf-res, v. Skansa USA Building,, defendants third-party plaintiffs- res, BLUE TURTLES,, defendants- res, Island Taping,, third-party defendant- ap Application to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Suffolk unty, dated December 4, Upon the stipulation of the attorneys for the respective parties to the appeal dated January 16, 2018, it is granted and the appeal is deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVE- RA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur. By Roman, P.J.; Maltese, Lasalle and Barros, JJ. Nella Rebello, etc. appellants-res, v. Nikolas Budimlic, etc. respondents- appellants def Application to withdraw an appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Nassau unty, dated June 16, Upon the stipulation of the attorneys for the respective parties to the appeal and cross appeal dated January 9, 2018, it is granted and the appeal and cross appeal are deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements. ROMAN, J.P., MALTESE, LASALLE and BARROS, JJ., concur. By Dillon, J.P.; Hinds-Radix, Maltese and Lasalle, JJ. PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Jina C. Hernandez, ap by Jina C. Hernandez pursuant to CPL for an extension of time to take an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Nassau unty, rendered June 6, 2017, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel. opposition or relation ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to extend the time to take the appeal is granted; and it is further, ORDERED that the moving papers are deemed to constitute a timely notice of appeal; ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for poor person relief, and for the assignment of counsel is denied, with leave to renew upon proper papers, including the appellant s affidavit setting forth (1) the amount and source of counsel fees paid to retained counsel in the trial court, and (2) whether the appellant was on bail before conviction, and, if so, the amount and source of the bail money, and if bail was the appellant s own money, what happened to the same after conviction. DILLON, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, MAL- TESE and LASALLE, JJ., concur. By Dillon, J.P.; Hinds-Radix, Maltese and Lasalle, JJ. PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Alex Frederic, ap by Alex Frederic pursuant to CPL for an extension of time to take an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, rendered July 20, 2017, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel. urt s Appellate Division Second Department «ntinued from previous page 28 WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2018 nylj.com

9 nylj.com WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, relation ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to extend the time to take the appeal is granted; and it is further, ORDERED that the moving papers are deemed to constitute a timely notice of appeal; ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for poor person relief, and for the assignment of counsel is denied, with leave to renew upon proper papers, including the appellant s affidavit setting forth (1) the appellant s full financial situation including all assets, both real and personal, as well as any and all sources of income before conviction, (2) whether the appellant was on bail before conviction, and, if so, the amount and source of the bail money, and if bail was the appellant s own money, what happened to the same after conviction. DILLON, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, MAL- TESE and LASALLE, JJ., concur. MATTER of ApplicATIONS for Extensions of Time Parties in the following causes have filed applications pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d) (2) to extend the time to perfect or to serve and file a brief. of the applications, it is ORDERED that the applications are granted and the following parties in the following causes are granted the specified extensions of time: Title Docket No. Applicant Name(s) Extended Deadline A.G. v. Pocantico Hills A. G., Jr. Central School DistrictAndrew Giordano, Sr.February 26, 2018 Arch Bay Holdings Arch Bay Holdings v DaisyMarch 14, 2018 Bank of New York Bank of New York Mellon Mellon v. Viola+3February 13, 2018 Caruso v. Premier Premier Paratransit, Paratransit, February 16, 2018 City of New York v. Bay City of New York Ridge Prince, February 5, 2018 City of New York v. Bay City of New York Ridge Prince, February 5, 2018 hen v. mpanion Life Jean hen March 19, 2018 Deutsche Bank National Mannes Rudman Trust mpany v. Rudman+1Lotty RudmanMarch 6, 2018 Title Docket No. Applicant Name(s) Extended Deadline Frangiamore v. Wayne Noel Eva Frangiamore Drywall March 2, 2018 Haxhia v. Varanelli Anna Haxhia Behar HaxhiaMarch 13, 2018 HSBC Bank USA, Denise Boursiquot National Association v BoursiquotFebruary 13, 2018 JPMorgan Chase Bank JPMorgan Chase Bank National AssociationNational Association v Gershfeld February 16, 2018 Kakharov v. Archer Narda E. Archer Lifespire, February 13, 2018 Kerolle v. Nicholson Theophile KerolleMarch 13, 2018 Madonna Management R.S. Naghavi, M.D., P Services, v. R.S. R. Naghavi, M.S., P Naghavi, M.D., P R.S. Naghavi March 12, 2018 Melia v. City of New York unty-Wide Insurance mpanymarch 13, 2018 Monterosso v. Garguilo Andrew Garguilo Elaine GarguiloFebruary 16, 2018 Montoya v. Matthews Brian J. Matthews Nassau unty mptrollers Office Nassau unty Police DepartmentMarch 30, 2018 People v. Christian, Antonio People of State of New YorkFebruary 27, 2018 People v. Hernandez, Juan People of State of New YorkMarch 8, 2018 People v. Lancaster, Herman People of State of New YorkFebruary 23, 2018 People v. Ramirez, Miguel People of State of New York February 16, 2018 Title Docket No. Applicant Name(s) Extended Deadline Spitzer v. Ruttner Emanuel Spitzer Grid Gardens February 5, 2018 State Farm Mutual State Farm Mutual Automobile Automobile Insurance Insurance mpany mpany v. ActualState Farm Indemnity mpany Chiropractic, P.C.State Farm Fire and Casualty mpanymarch 14, 2018 US Bank NA v. Osuji US Bank NA February 16, 2018 Valente v. Persico Realty Persico Realty Persico ntracting & Trucking, February 15, 2018 Vista Engineering Vista Engineering oration oration v. Everest Indemnity New York City Transit Authority Metropolitan Transit AuthorityFebruary 8, 2018 Wilmington Trust mpany Raymond Graham v GrahamMarch 12, 2018 Wilson v. PBM, Ronnie WilsonMarch 27, 2018 By Mastro, J.P.; hen, Lasalle and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ. PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Wenky Innocent, ap by Wenky Innocent pursuant to CPL for an extension of time to take an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Suffolk unty, rendered March 17, 2017, for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel. opposition or relation ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to extend the time to take the appeal is granted; and it is further, ORDERED that the moving papers are deemed to constitute a timely notice of appeal; ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for poor person relief, and for the assignment of counsel is denied, with leave to renew upon proper papers, including the appellant s affidavit setting forth the amount and source of counsel fees paid to retained counsel. MASTRO, J.P., COHEN, LASALLE and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur. By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ. Lorie Ann SWAIN, res, v. Michael Omedes, ap Appeal by Michael Omedes from an order of the unty urt, Suffolk unty, dated October 25, On the urt s own motion, it is ORDERED that the appeal is transferred to the Appellate Term of the Supreme urt, Ninth and Tenth Judicial Districts (see 22 NYCRR 730.1[d]); ORDERED that all further proceedings in connection with the appeal shall be conducted pursuant to the rules of the Appellate Term of the Supreme urt, Ninth and Tenth Judicial Districts. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVE- RA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur. By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ. M.B. Din nstruction,, appellant-res, et al., plf, v. DELTA Iron & nstruction,, et al., def, American Safety Casualty Insurance company, res-res Application by American Safety Casualty on an appeal and a cross appeal from a judgment of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated May 23, 2017, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect its cross appeal. of the application and no papers having ORDERED that on the urt s own motion, the appeal by M.B. Dinn nstruction,, is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to timely perfect in accordance with the rules of this urt (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[e]); granted, and the time for American Safety Casualty to perfect is enlarged until February 27, SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVE- RA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur. By Balkin, J.P.; Austin, Roman and Sgroi, JJ. MATTER of Darren Palmitesta, ap, v. Elizabeth Palmitesta, res On the urt s own motion, it is ORDERED that the decision and order on motion of this urt dated January 16, 2018, in the above-entitled case is recalled and vacated, and the following decision and order on motion is substituted therefor: Appeal by Darren Palmitesta from an order of the Family urt, Nassau unty, dated July 31, By order to show cause dated November 17, 2017, the parties were directed to show cause before this urt 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 dated September 15, 2017, pursuant to 670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this urt (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]). by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel. Now, upon the order to show cause and the papers filed in response thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the appellant s motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied; and it is further, ORDERED that the appellant s motion is granted; ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the briefs of the appellant, the respondent, and the attorney for the child, 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); 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 urt, and the clerk of the Family urt shall furnish one of such certified transcripts to the appellant s assigned counsel, without charge; in the case of transcription services, one transcript shall be filed with the clerk of the Family urt and one transcript shall be delivered to the assigned counsel. Assigned counsel is directed to provide copies of said transcripts to all of the other parties to the appeal, including the attorney for the child, if any, when counsel serves the appellant s brief upon those parties; ORDERED that pursuant to Family urt Act 1120 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal: Amy L. lvin, Esq. 9 Everette Place Huntington, NY ORDERED that the assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with any or orders issued pursuant to 670.4(a) of the rules of this urt (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]); ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order on motion upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken; ORDERED that pursuant to 670.4(a) of the rules of this urt (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), 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 urt, and the appellant shall notify this urt by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this decision and order on motion; ORDERED that pursuant to 670.4(a) of the rules of this urt (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), within 30 days after the date of this decision and order on motion, the assigned counsel shall file in the office of the Clerk of this urt one of the following: (1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of the Family urt proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or (2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation stating 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 this decision and order on motion has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken, 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 actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above has been taken within 30 days of the date of this decision and order on motion, the Clerk of the urt shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed. BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN and SGROI, JJ., concur. By Mastro, J.P.; Leventhal, Sgroi and nnolly, JJ. Carol fasano, res, v. St. Bernard Church ap by the appellants to stay the trial in the aboveentitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme urt, Kings unty, dated August 3, opposition ORDERED that the motion is denied. MASTRO, J.P., LEVENTHAL, SGROI and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur. Kings unty Second Department SUPREME COURT Justice Sylvia Ash Capital One Equipment v. Desanges (518746/17) Denied Short Form Capital One Equipment v. Tahalov (522219/17) Short Form Harasani v. Schoenberger (518277/17) Short Form Prime Protective Systems, v. Lawrence Nursing Care (510056/14) Short Form Justice Loren Baily-Schiffman Bah v. Roberts (509125/15) Denied Desimone v. Town Sports Int l (517488/17) Denied Dickson v. Genus (517970/17) Denied Douglas v. Nissan-Infiniti (518330/17) Ellis v. 730 Franklin Ave. (511295/15) Denied Ghatas v. Cameo Hldg. (504618/15) Gutierrez v. Good Bar (515600/15) Denied Heeralall v. Elkafrawy (512499/16) Grant Ext Short Form Jones v. Mauge (513819/17) Denied Leon v. Hoffman (514051/15) Noto v. Hochiminh (520770/16) Rsl Funding v. McCrudden (3138/17) Denied Sagardia v. R G Bus (504814/17) Denied Watanasoon-Tararuksa v. Foreign Dev. Services (518097/16) Wilson v. Singh (516080/17) Zholanji v. 52 Wooster Owner (512897/16) Justice Johnny Lee Baynes U.S. Bank Nat l Assoc. v. Figueroa (15773/09) Puryear v. Hutchinson (510143/17) Denied Puryear v. Hutchinson (510143/17) Jp Morgan Chase Bank v. Parmann Mortgage (4424/14) Marked Off McQueen v. Bank of NY As Trustee (509371/15) Marked Off Totans v. Bellhaven Center For (517556/17) Marked Off Justice Central mpliance Part Acosta v. llazo (2024/15) Aguilar v. 756 Union (500689/16) Akpan v. Sharma (242/16) Alston v. Kings Ready Mix, (509259/16) Alvarado v. Progressive Mgt. of NY (8528/15) Andrusier v. Vaturi (13972/15) Anthony v. Dragados USA, (513466/15) Artemenko v. Club Cats (501244/15) Automobile v. Gaudioso ntracting (503241/16) Averman v. Chang (7581/15) Baum v. Famous Dave s of America (22448/13) Beckles v. American Foreclosure Network (508062/15) Bennett-Brandon v. Wang (521888/16) Bhattarcharya v Properties (520939/16) Bishop v. Pennsylvania Ave. (505234/16) Black v. Rubio (519954/17) Marked Off Bsd 270 v. Hsbc Bank Nat. (513750/15) Calamia v. Wan (10940/15) Casquete v. Hpeny Housing Dev. (505134/15) Cekic v. City Point Retail Dev. (8410/14) Chambers-Douglas v. M.R.A Enterprises of NY. (13698/15) Charles v. Johnson (505224/16) Cherestal v. Grossman (503921/15) ntrolled Dismantling v. R Sanfilippo & (4232/13) Cruz v Kingsland Ave. (508536/16) Currie v. Mansoor (501989/15) Denis v. Bruma (297/15) Marked Off Didyk v. Macy s Retail Hldgs. (504259/15) Duviella v. Richards-Jonas (1654/16) Edouarzin v. Boston (12740/15) Evans v. Mta (1931/16) Gaffney v. Aagj, (508799/16) Garelik v. Garcia (6255/15) Gonzalez v. Perez (510634/17) Marked Off Gros v. Khanam (507039/17) Guerrero v. Bre Park Ave. Tower Owner (509589/16) Harridath v. Cabral (17330/13) Marked Off Holmes v. Linden-Nostrand Gardens, (514149/16) Huggins v. Amelia C. Gayer (506818/13) Imbert v. Carmack (516189/16) Ivanina v. Chernobelsky (512003/16) Johnson v. Ramsay (14996/15) Marked Off Joseph v. Sivan Rlty. (12177/14) Marked Off Lallemand v. Ferguson (13809/15) Laporte v. NYCHA (13588/15) Leslie Eichner v. U.S. Tennis (511735/16) Louis v. Martin (1056/16) Louis-Juste v. Fisher Park Lane Owner (513364/15) Lutheran Augustana Center v. Sanfilippo (1050/15) Marked Off Madison-Pottinger v. Fort Green uncil (516971/16) Malek v. Fleetwash, of New Jersey (508071/16) McCloud v. Ordonez (13551/15) Mcnnell v. Lewis (507426/16) Merlin v. Kofinas (514473/15) Marked Off Mermerstein v. Samet (9489/14) Marked Off Morales v. Garzon (1273/15) Novick v. Kojak Cab (505348/16) Nugent v. Senior Ride (515773/16) Pinello v. Deleo (501849/17) Rahim v. Kaba Rlty. (514031/15) Richards v. James (511594/16) Roberts v. Alvanes (500437/16) Rosenberg v. Schnitzler (510812/15) Ruben v Ralph Rlty.. (21018/13) Sanchez v. Jones (2963/16) Sharon v. 398 Bond St. (21434/13) Smith v. Ambrosio (509692/16) Sweet v. McKenna (507641/16) Tapia v. Guzman (508905/16) Vanguard Dermatology Pc v. Sunrise Hldgs. Group (4679/11) Varela v. 1 East 66th St. (511531/16) Walker v. Brookdale Univ. Hosiptal (14952/14) Williams v. Flat Gas (18056/11) Zhong v. Man (507721/16) Justice Devin hen Washington Homes v. Jones (512312/16) Application Denied Justice Dear-Foreclosure Resolution Pt Fed. Nat. Mortgage v. Gray (10655/13) Declined To Sign Application Low v. U.S. Bank Nat. Assoc. (1476/17) Marked Off Us Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Verpile (22251/12) Marked Off U.S. Bank Nat. v. Gordon (502593/13) Declined To Sign Application Justice Default Judgment Part lon Rosario v. 2 Elton (505118/17) Curmon v. Amazura Technologies (2825/16) Denied Nationstar Mortgage v. Dowell (511734/17) Case Settle Judgment Powell v. Hendriks (508453/16) Denied Powell v. Hendriks (508453/16) Scott v. Regina (511087/17) Case Scott v. Regina (511087/17) Scott v. Regina (511087/17) Justice Lara J. Genovesi, 5j Gardner v. Gardner (53822/17) Justice Dawn Jimenez Salta Brailsford v. 82 urt St. (864/16) Ennis v. Anmac Hldg. (8875/15) Gh v. Central Amusement (13952/15) Lodato v. Benevetin (4520/15) Justice Jury ordinating Part 1 Diroche v. Yudin (504651/15) Grant Ext Short Form Justice Lawrence Knipel, Frp3 Citimortgage, v. Ehrenreich (10868/12) Case Fed. Nat. Mortgage v. Fuller (12506/10) Case Flagstar Bank v. Walker (8230/11) Case Hartford Funding v. Harris (561/12) Case Hsbc Bank USA v. Cayo (6910/10) Settle on Notice Jpmorgan Chase Bank v. Pessu (15271/13) Case Nationstar Mortgage v. Peguese (2174/12) Settle on Notice U.S. Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Shick (5648/09) Case Us Bank Na v. Wielgus (5021/10) Case Us Bank Trust Na v. Shalom (27480/09) Case Us Bank v. Haspel (8794/11) Case Wells Fargo Bank v. Buco (3546/12) Settle on Notice Wells Fargo Home Mortgage v. Peterson (49212/01) nsolidated With Wilmington Savings Fund v. Noel (501514/12) Case U.S. Bank v. Stewart (4288/11) Justice Lawrence Knipel Allstate v. NYC (501543/14) Grant Ext Short Form nroy v. nroy (508932/16) Gethers v. Metro. (509552/16) Grant Ext Short Form Justice Knipel Perreira v. Ogbomo (508725/14) Short Form Justice Larry D. Martin Minault v. oper Capital Group Ltd (27910/10) Justice E.M. Morgenstern Juchniewicz v. Juchniewicz (53804/17) Marked Off Justice Mark Partnow Hsbc Bank USA v. Shoughi (45445/07) Declined To Sign Application Us Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Rodriguez (32035/09) Application Denied Justice Karen B. Rothenberg Lewis v. U.S. Bank Nat. (522890/16) Decided As Indicated Justice Wayne P. Saitta 109 Gates Ave. v. Edrasis (17541/10) Short Form Cacerez v. Cuccia (506419/15) Short Form Casimir v. Legacy Yards Tenant (500230/15) Denied Short Form Casimir v. Legacy Yards Tenant (500230/15) Grant Ext Short Form Davis v. Lend Lease (us) (10791/12) Elie v. Desramequx (6510/09) Denied Short Form Kuhner v. Mitchell (2948/15) Legrand v. Paul (2544/16) Short Form Nova Casualty v. Xd Yang & Friends. (10540/13) Denied Short Form Stith v. Sunset Investment (1867/15) Denied Short Form Stone St. Capital v. Ge Capital Assignment (522433/17) Wood v. Jacobs (14/18) Short Form Justice Wayne P. Saitta, Pt. 74 Atlantic Wool Inc v. NYS Urban Dev. (6107/15) Denied Justice Arthur M. Schack Wells Fargo Home Mortgage Inc v. Northcutt (10417/04) Restored in Regular Justice Debra Silber Allen v. New 56th And Park (NY) (505034/16) Bartiromo v. Alvarez (500400/17) Denied Borgia v. Klk (511801/17) Marked Off Casquete v. Hpeny Housing Dev. (505134/15) Denied Casquete v. Hpeny Housing Dev. (505134/15) Curreri v. Jogen Rlty. II (506580/17) J.G. Wentworth Originations v. Prudential Ins. (3228/17) Morozov v. Buckwalter P. (504556/16) Navickas v. Khaimova (502797/13) Stuto v. Esposito-Gazzoli (512004/16) Marked Off Justice Spodek Delpino v. Nicholson (7549/13) Justice Ellen M. Spodek Pankiv v. Richmond Center For (503800/16) Stayed Justice Sweeney Citimortgage, v. Rhodes (20080/11) Denied Hsbc Bank USA v. Smith (14805/11) Denied U.S. Bank Nat. v. Rutkowski (503615/12) Denied U.S. Bank Nat. v. Rutkowski (503615/12) Justice Peter Sweeney Us Bank Nat. v. Bandhu (5066/11) Denied Justice Sweeney Wells Fargo Bank v. Burgos (8409/12) Denied Christiana Trust v. Rosales (15557/12) Denied Wells Fargo Bank v. Daniel (31139/09) Denied Justice Sylvia Ash Hsbc Bank USA v. Poznanski (19959/12) Short Form Bank of NY v. Snagg (37441/07) Short Form Justice Delores J. Thomas Bragg v. Bragg (55040/17) Bragg v. Bragg (55040/17) on ndition Piliero v. Vatter (54211/17) Denied Piliero v. Vatter (54211/17) Stewart v. Harvey-Lewis (53526/14) Pd - Stewart v. Harvey-Lewis (53526/14) Pd - Justice Richard Velasquez Aginsky v Ocean Ave (503834/17) Short Form Aginsky v Ocean Ave (503834/17) Marked Off llins v. Juncalito Abajo Meat Market (13425/15) Short Form Govt. Employees v. Brown (522515/17) Denied Short Form Hooper Rlty. Hldgs. v. Wt USA (510718/16) Short Form Jara nst. v. E And A nst. of NY (519057/16) Short Form Lafebre-Rodal v. Curtis (508122/17) Short Form McCall v. Harris (520289/16) Short Form McLean v. Rcs Rlty. (509117/15) Short Form Ostrovskaya v. Rodkopf (509441/17) Short Form Justice Carolyn E. Wade Goldstein v. Maya Car Service (6379/16) Denied Queens unty Second Department SUPREME COURT Centralized Part Hernandez v. Scharpf (13611/14) Mot Denied W/leave Albanese v. Metro. Transit (12612/15) Birotte v. Persaud (705869/16) Bolivard v. Burrough (5506/16) Chessen v. Abm (708148/16) Deng v. Ahmad (708106/17) Dipalo v. Valentin (707118/16) Pd - Dumervil v. Port Auth. of New (704843/16) Eng v. Hongqing (704827/16) Gancarz v. Bklyn. Pier (713247/16) Green v. Bill Wolf (706454/16) Hardowar v. Perez (707308/16) Hu v. Lee (707025/17) Iturralde v. Diocese of Bklyn. (9935/16) Jin v. NYC (703088/16) Kim v. Valencia (6032/16) Kim v. Simon Prop. Group (709592/17) Lachman v. Krishnadatt (14167/14) Mills v. NYCHA (711718/16) Mora v. Hill (714993/16) Muhammad v. Nnit (706642/16) Nagales v. Prologis (702559/16) Patch v. NYCTA (705433/14) Raja v. Silva (9480/15) Rengifo-Duran v. NYC (707108/16) Reyes v. Sanchez Quijano (708560/16) Tamayo v. Huang (712141/15) Pd - s continued on next page»

10 30 WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2018 nylj.com urt s Queens unty Second Department «ntinued from previous page Tavares v. Mozumder (711161/15) See Teng v. Arce (11742/16) Whittingham v. Alesi (13630/15) Zheng v. Sacani (703828/16) Justice Master Foreclosure Judge Fed. Nat. Mortgage v. Jahan (6184/13) Signed U.S. Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Vasquez (20230/13) Disp-Jfs Signed Deutsche Bank Nat. v. Linan (10585/09) U.S. Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Sakizada (5833/12) Denied Justice Pam B. Jackman Brown U.S Bank v. Croney (705103/15) Signed Behedo v. Brother s Staffing (23745/12) Pd-Submit /judg Biancospino v. Koenig (703004/15) Denied Emigrant Funding v. Quang- Do Rlty. (708196/16) Denied Gao v. Chen (703373/14) Denied Guadalupe v. Chickla Service (12865/14) See Long Island Univ. v. T.J.N. (700407/13) Submit /judg NYCTL Trust v. Paris Lic Rlty. (702623/17) Denied NYCTL 2013-A Trust v. Infinity Homes, (16830/14) Submit /judg Orenstein v. Law Offices of (714322/16) See Quality Automotive Services v. Advance Fleet Maint.. (21951/13) Denied Stewart v. Marte (23978/04) Pd - Denied Us Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Sheodial (16126/08) Pd - Denied Verduga v. L & M 2180 (703065/14) Denied Flushing Savings Bank v. Sooknandan (6201/09) Pd - Denied Jenkins v. First Bronx Rlty. Mgt. (2585/14) Pd - See Knox v. Rose (712023/16) Denied Livermore v. Sebro (4826/15) To The Extent Melrose Credit Union v. Rey (706335/17) Denied The Bank of NY Mellon v. Dohman (701209/15) Disp-Jfs Signed U.S. Bank Trust v. Jones (705459/15) Signed Lopez v. Mauldin Iv (706130/17) Denied Mandal v. Mentesheville (704679/17) Case Novembre Sainvilus v. Upward Mobility Limo (704089/15) Denied Joseph v. Elm Air nditioning (12327/15) Kang v. Branch (713071/16) McKibben v. Renta (711087/15) Zhang v. Sol Goldman Investments (5420/16) Justice Cheree Buggs Maris v. Dan s Supreme (710911/17) Reid-Rogers v. Wal-Mart Stores East Lp (712281/17) Justice Denis J. Butler Hudson City Savings Bank v. Pasucci (16055/13) Signed H & R Block Bank v. Skeete (530/13) Disp-Jfs Signed Wilmington Savings Fund v. Delva (701496/15) Signed Bac Home Loans Servicing Lp v. Rubira (16675/09) Signed Hsbc Bank USA v. Gavilanez (23274/13) Pd - Marked Off Sang Lee v. Zurita (709204/17) NYCTL 2016-A Trust v. Tejada (709705/17) Ex Parte Signed Justice Diccia T. Pineda-Kirwan U.S. Bank Nat. v. Douglin (703804/17) Submit /judg Freedom Mortgage v. Budram (709149/14) Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust v. Vera (704650/15) Marked Off Fives v. Frcm Case-Acme (21053/11) So ed Stip Gutierrez v. NYC (15596/14) Pd - Jin v. Korean Beauty (706783/17) Marked Off New City Sliquors, v. Monarch Brokerage (718/15) Pd - So ed Stip Vaquedano v. Breezy Point -Op. (703919/15) Mot Denied W/leave Vielle v. Zumba (7618/16) Justice Timothy J. Dufficy Phh Mortgage v. Bell (708725/14) Ex Parte Signed Mendoza v. Young Mens Mutual (4782/15) Justice Ernest F. Hart NYC v. * (307/18) Casedisp-Exp Feijoo-Acosta v. NYC (1153/17) Gmac Mortgage v. Horton (16727/11) Viera v. NYC (709583/16) Marked Off Banks v. Bedekovich (441/18) Casedisp-Exp Justice Joseph J. Esposito R. v. Renanim Daycare (701661/16) Pd-mpromise Signed Justice Darrell L. Gavrin Nyctl 2015-A Trust v. Three Sons Real Estate Group (707256/16) Pd- Exp Santander nsumer USA v. Rabelo (714593/17) Osc-Declined Hsbc Bank USA v. Mekhuri (700385/15) Pd Osc Declined The Bank of NY Mellon v. Barrow (710257/17) Ex Parte Signed Justice M. A. Grays Pita v. Saikia-Eapen (715431/17) Baptist v. Lopez (714242/16) Joint Justice Rudolph E. Greco, JR. Fuzaylova v. Dadamo (708604/17) Joint Rasheed v. Lalli Bawa Developers (701554/16) Marked Off Justice Kevin Kerrigan Drsm Hldgs. v. Langott (3195/11) Disp-Jfs Signed Black v. Queensborough mmunity (713745/17) Case Martinez v. Teh NYC (704799/13) To The Extent Mociran v. NYC (704493/16) Pd - Polanco v. NYCH&HC And (703211/12) Denied Boyd v. Benzant (709453/17) Inquest At Time of Central Mortgage v. McGhie (5861/13) Case Chaney v. NYC (715305/17) Case Galasso v. NYC (707127/16) Hsbc Bank USA. v. Hossain (9033/08) Pd - Denied Kaur v. NYCH&HC (701805/13) Pd- mpromise Signed NYCTL 2016-A Trust v rd Drive Rlty. (708637/17) Ex Parte Signed Pyant v. NYC (22517/12) Pd - Ram v. NYC (1082/16) Pd - Rios v. NYC (5787/16) Rodriguez v. NYC (711354/15) Marked Off Td Bank v. Rodriguez (713515/16) Case Tomas S. Olivares v. Ashok Desai (5971/17) Justice Ulysses B. Leverett Hunter v. Planned Building Services (715053/17) Marked Off Schwab v. St. Francis Hosp. (704185/16) Justice Leonard Livote Nationstar Mortgage v. Oh (11808/13) Disp-Jfs Signed U.S. Bank Trust v. Mackay (705192/14) Disp-Jfs Signed Diaz v. Jzheng s Rlty. (9419/14) Pd - Ktori v. Douroudakis (8394/15) Pd - Marked Off Justice Robert J. McDonald B v. Blakely (709649/17) Joint Kaiassas v. Mta Bus (703363/17) Joint New Penn Motor Express v. Dos-Ramos (706525/17) Joint Valeus v. Johnson (10241/16) Joint Blue Hill Rlty. Plus v. Jpmorgan Chase Bank (717244/17) Marked Off Justice Salvatore Modica Gonzalez v. Stackhouse (700756/16) Gray v. Blue Rlty. Mgt. (703424/17) Justice Peter O Donoghue Alayon v. Silberman (702206/16) Justice Leslie J. Purificacion Yoon v. Cuevas (702227/17) Joint Domany v. Valencia (714441/16) Marked Off Vainroob v. Daily (710307/16) Justice Thomas D. Raffaele American Transit Ins. v. Francisque (708677/17) Case Borohov v. Queens Fresh Meadows (713988/16) Inquest ed Chroscielewski v. Chroscielewski (5020/17) See Mainor v. Grand Bk (700806/15) Progressive v. Isaacov (716532/17) To The Extent Begum v. Lana Exp Cab (4488/15) Denied Dolkar v. Princess Tours (712336/15) Pd - See Melrose Credit Union v. Joseph (707744/17) Case Melrose Credit Union v. Dullys (709749/17) Case Wilmington Savings Fund v. Digioia (705850/16) Disp-Jfs Signed Bank of America v. Unknown Heirs of The Estate (701438/15) Signed Bank of NY v. Matam (16567/07) Pd - Signed Bayview Loan Servicing v. Singh (711401/16) Signed Capital One v. Avendano (704794/16) Signed Hsbc Bank USA v. Clarke (701640/16) Disp-Jfs Signed Ma v. Diaz (3131/16) Reverse Mortgage Solutions v. Heirs At Large of Gloria (711249/15) Disp- Jfs Signed The Bank of NY Mellon v. An (700130/16) Signed Wells Fargo Bank v. Beauduy (31027/10) Pd - Signed Wells Fargo Bank v. Huerta (11205/11) Pd - Signed Wells Fargo Bank v. Marte (15981/13) Pd - Signed Mtglq Investors v. Saywack (10023/11) Disp-Jfs Signed Td Auto Finance v. Lewis (700515/17) Case Wells Fargo Bank v. Thornton (703675/15) Disp-Jfs Signed Chung v. Gahagan (9826/15) Denied Kim v. Lee (701967/16) Denied Mostafa v. Rodriguez (701710/16) Denied Nationstar Mortgage v. Mentore (700380/14) Pd - Marked Off Heights Medical Care v. Allstate Fire & Casualty (717200/17) Justice F. Sampson Us Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Sheodial (16126/08) Pd - Denied Cameron v. Pilios (11187/15) Jamil v. Kim (9024/16) Koss v. First Newtown (706526/17) Justice Janice A. Taylor Long Island v. Patel (12402/17) Bank of NY Mellon v. Obaidi (701812/13) Signed Ditech Financial v. Harel (707366/16) Signed Hsbc Bank USA v. Farrell (709055/14) Signed Hsbc Bank USA v. Gordon (705986/14) Lfo Declined-Submit Anew Jpmorgan Chase Bank v. Kolawole (18255/13) Disp-Jfs Signed NYCTL Trust v. Drake (2430/14) Pd - Signed NYCTL 2009-A Trust v. Zmzm Int l, (5115/10) Lfo Declined-Submit Anew U.S. Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Miller (5257/13) Signed Citimortgage, v. De La Cruz (4244/10) Disp-Jfs Signed Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust v. Raposo (710265/15) Signed Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust v. Reynolds (708838/14) Signed Jpmorgan Chase Bank v. Nash (20488/09) Lfo Declined-Submit Anew Wells Fargo Bank v. Diponti (19872/10) Disp-Jfs Signed Wells Fargo Bank v. Haque (26151/09) Disp-Jfs Signed Wells Fargo Bank v. Reece (1356/14) Disp-Jfs Signed Justice Sally E. Unger Pennymac v. Jenkins (11017/10) Disp-Jfs Signed Justice C. Velasquez Ahmed v. Sharma (714201/17) Miranda v. Filpo (2739/16) Justice Allan B. Weiss Macdonald v. Hsbc Bank USA (713079/17) Pd Osc Declined NYCTL 2016-A Trust v. J. Reilly Rlty. Etal (708351/17) Ex Parte Signed Rozario v. Highland Care Center, (713693/17) U.S. Bank v. Parra (708042/14) Pd - Marked Off Justice Elizabeth Yablon Evangelista v. Evangelista (27695/11) Pd - Richmond unty Second Department SUPREME COURT Justice Thomas Aliotta M&T Bank v. Tiburcio (135538/15) Attached M&T Bank v. Trinidad (135163/16) Attached Justice Kim Dollard NYC v. 4131b Hylan Boulevard (150045/18) Signed Carlucci v. Lanfranchi (100326/16) Short Form Halisky v Akr (100559/15) Short Form M & M Deli v. Jackal Rlty. And Hldgs. (101754/12) Short Form Olivo v. Jersey Beauty Supply (101936/14) Short Form Port Auth. of NY v. NYC Paving (101759/14) Short Form Simpson v. Edghill (100166/16) Short Form Justice Desmond Green Wilmington Savings Fund v. Garcia Jr. (130873/10) Attached Nationstar Mortgage v. Amon (135795/14) Signed Justice Alan C Marin Adams v. Altan Hldgs. (151719/17) Adams v. Altan Hldgs. (151719/17) Short Form Allstate v. Amatrudo (85240/17) Moot Allstate v. Amatrudo (85240/17) Barry s Auto Body of NY v. Allstate Fire & Casualty (152162/17) Short Form Beck v. Gonchar (151070/17) C.C. Jr v. Fly High Indoor Trampoline (85259/17) Short Form Christiana Trust v. Anderson (101145/14) Attached Deutsche Bank v. O Brien (131819/09) Attached Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust v. Burzo (151246/17) Submit Diaz v. Green (151651/17) Short Form Dicker v. Desimone (100023/17) Short Form Dimarzio v. Levit (151121/17) Short Form Evergreen Park ndominium I v. Higgins (150476/16) Attached Gentile v. Alliance Pest Mgt. (101018/13) Referred To Jho J. E. v. Herzog (151063/15) Short Form Luwisch v. Hanna (152471/17) Short Form McCusker v. Lata (151644/17) Montanaro v. Rudchyk (152343/17) Short Form Nosseir v. Richmond Industrial Center (151737/17) Short Form Palermo v. NY Police Dept. (85239/17) Short Form Peachtree Settlement v. Hartford Life Ins. (85248/17) Submit Rivera v. Falu (100020/14) Short Form Russo v. Kim (151577/16) Short Form Tamborra v. Victory Auto Repair, (85230/17) Short Form Telesford v. Celentano (151366/17) Short Form Justice O. Marrazzo, Jr. M.L. v. I C Bus (152120/17) Signed Dunovant v. Dunovant (80098/17) Short Form Agostino & v. Cigna (152608/17) Settle on Notice Board of Directors of Aspen v. Lettine (151723/17) Signed rnerstone Quarry 2010 v. Sylvain (150819/16) Short Form Deliteris v. Richmond Univ. Medical (150319/16) Denied Elvir v. Popaz (150241/17) Short Form Javois v. Javois (85250/17) Settle on Notice Rodriguez v. Kleinbart (80074/17) Denied Justice Philip G. Minardo Wachovia Mortgage v. Michalopoulos (103043/08) Short Form Justice B. Panepinto Bushell v. Bushell (50085/13) Pd - Hoenig v. Crapo-Hoenig (50113/17) Short Form Larosa v. Larosa (50260/17) Pd- Mot Martinez v. Martinez (51010/16) Settle on Notice Vargas v. Vargas (50221/11) Pd - Justice Residential Foreclosure Part Deutsche Bank Nat. v. Savasta (130622/12) Moot Fed. Nat. Mortgage v. Erenses (130147/14) Fed. Nat. Mortgage v. Nelson (135825/16) Moot Green Tree Servicing v. Abdelgaied (130185/14) Moot Lakeview Loan Servicing v. Suriel (135906/16) M&T Bank v. Masseria (131068/13) Settle on Notice Nesslex v. Gieri (130627/12) Settle on Notice U.S. Bank Nat. v. Curtis (135326/15) Wells Fargo Bank v. Genova (130729/13) Wells Fargo Bank v. Angela Mandic (135346/15) Wells Fargo Bank v. Tregerman (135341/16) Wells Fargo Bank v. Wagner (135827/16) Nassau unty Second Department SUPREME COURT Justice Anna Anzalone Frobey v. Ketsoglou (604681/16) Decided Jet Line Prods. of Long v. Douant Pools & Spas, (605584/16) Radakovic v. D Arienzo M.D. (4944/16) unty of Nassau v. Dergarabedian (609474/16) Decided unty of Nassau v. Lucatorto (608558/16) Decided unty of Nassau v. Snow (609476/16) unty of Nassau v. Sume (605348/16) Decided Justice Stacy D. Bennett Nieto v. Nieto (203160/15) Pd - Decided Gentiluomo v. Gentiluomo (200980/16) Pd - Justice Antonio I. Brandveen Howard v. South Nassau mmunities (607536/16) Power Up Lending Group v. Adama Technologies (610424/17) Scarpinato v. mpletely vered Ins. (6687/16) Herrera v. Icochea (610994/17) W/d Pursuant Dcm Rule Silverman v. Mena (609292/16) Justice Jeffrey S. Brown Brown v. Nassau (3688/17) Case Falk v. Nassau unty (600868/17) Decided Flushing Bank v. East West Marine (607755/17) Decided Greubel v. Sprung (3279/16) Progressive Casualty v. Mds Medical Device (610785/17) Case Submit Judgment Justice Robert A. Bruno All City Leasing v. Vena (10051/15) Denied Arbucci v. Massapequa Park (604316/16) Discover Bank v. Fisher (601746/14) Denied Justice R. Bruce zzens, Jr. Blanc v. Oral And Maxillofacial (602777/16) Denied Wilson v Rlty.,. (603639/17) W/d Pursuant Dcm Rule Justice Edmund Dane le v. le (201843/16) Pd - Justice Vito M. DeStefano Casavecchia v. Mizrahi (6679/05) Denied Next Millennium Rlty. v. Travelers mpanies (600996/16) Decided First Class Child Care v. North Shore Early (13073/12) Decided Justice T. Feinman Bentivegna v. Harun (600779/17) Decided McKenna v. Miller (1535/16) Olivio v. Ciminera (1863/17) Justice Foreclosure Part Everbank v. Charleston (2126/13) Us Bank Na v. Daly (2189/17) Justice Foreclosure Part 3 Abl One v. M&R Real Estate Advisors (611290/17) Denied Abl One v. M&R Real Estate Advisors (611290/17) Cit Bank v. Wolf (5007/16) Jpmorgan Chase Bank v. 456 Glen ve Ave. (608098/17) L&L Hldg. v. Brancaleone (607449/17) Justice Foreclosure Part M&T Bank v. Kim (9947/14) Justice Foreclosure Part 3 Nassau Prop. Investors v. A. Ottavino Prop. (609136/17) Decided Nassau Prop. Investors v. A. Ottavino Prop. (609136/17) New Millennium Bank v. Kenny Family (610097/17) Justice Foreclosure Part Stae of NY Mortgage v. Jerome (551/14) U.S. Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Pacot (605133/17) Decided Justice Foreclosure Part 3 Us Bank As Cust For v. Grayson (607292/17) Bank of America v. First Rate Capital (605915/17) Case Justice Foreclosure Part Bank of NY v. Rimmels (10098/15) Justice Foreclosure Part 3 Elm Capital v. Whetstone (601990/15) Justice Foreclosure Part Jp Morgan Chase Bank v. Sardana (2919/13) Jp Morgan Chase Bank Na v. Kashetsky (6277/16) Jp Morgan Chase Bank Na v. Rivers (7293/15) Justice Foreclosure Part 3 L&L Hldg. v. Fox (8418/16) Justice Foreclosure Part Nationstar Mortgage v. Marcellus (5462/16) Nationstar Mortgage v. Pena (2159/17) Pnc Bank v. Brevaire (12763/12) The Bank of NY Mellon v. Calle (1214/14) U.S. Bank Nat. v. Broome-Accius (7710/14) U.S. Bank Nat. v. Keiper (168/16) U.S. Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Omessi (4477/15) U.S.Bank Trust v. Johnson Jr. (8941/15) Us Bank Na v. Ruiz (5961/16) Us Bank Trust Na v. Sampogna (2168/17) Case Justice Foreclosure Citimortgage, v. Restrepo (10973/13) Denied Pnc Bank v. Brevaire (12763/12) Denied Justice S. Gianelli Long Beach Rd Rlty. v. Hempstead (179/17) Paul v. Johnson (10946/15) Denied Justice Steven M. Jaeger Diel v. Diel (202038/16) Decided Levy v. Levy (201103/12) Pd - Decided Marsella v. Marsella (201279/17) McLoughlin v. Odabasi Darian (201326/07) Pd - Decided Justice Roy S. Mahon Avagnano v. Hatsis (610031/16) W/d Pursuant Dcm Rule Justice Randy Sue Marber Superior Uniform Group, v. Gertler (611409/17) Schuler v. Kolb (502/16) Case Justice Karen V. Murphy Ajani v. Hart (607692/15) Denied Alan B. Pearl & Assoc v. Accurate Signs & Awnings (6717/16) Denied Justice Anthony L. Parga Bello v. Center For Dev.al (600612/18) Justice George R. Peck Andruzzi v. Bethpage Town Square (609572/16) Fahey v. Razinsky (7507/16) Denied Justice Denise L. Sher Rogers v. Jones Lang Lasalle Americas (602594/12) Denied Justice Leonard Steinman Muzio v. Levittown Union Free School (602177/15) Justice Hope Zimmerman Kirton v. Kirton (203278/16) Decided Kirton v. Kirton (203278/16) Denied Suffolk unty Second Department SUPREME COURT Justice Paul J. Baisley, Jr Becker v. Kagel (16/8333) Justice Joseph Farneti Planet Home Lending v. Samuels (17/610249) Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust v. Beaubrun (14/69227) Goldberg v. Manor Haven Adult Home (16/7570) Spota v. Allaway (17/4865) Justice William Ford Jpmorgan Chase Bank v. Prendergast (16/601464) Referred To Foreclosure Dept Justice Jerry Garguilo Thompson v. Shavette (18/218) Case Justice C. Stephen Hackeling Allstate v. Hernandez-Rubio (16/618573) Case Medcomp Systems v. Wani (17/1015- CO) Justice Howard Heckman Chevy Chase Bank v. Silver (09/10392) Citimortgage, v. Mendoza (14/68213) Case Deutsche Bank v. Remigio (15/611316) Case Fed. Nat. Mortgage v. Loo (14/69904) Case Hsbc Bank USA v. Stiefer (14/71014) Case Hsbcbank USA v. Stein (12/35810) Hudson City Savings Bank v. Diffley (15/603809) Case Jpmorgan Chase Bank v. Franwick (16/600840) Case M&T Bank v. Ramos (17/612616) Ocwen Loan Servicing v. Glanzman (12/20781) Case Wells Fargo Bank v. Sucich (17/616970) Wells Fargo Delaware v. Marcotrigiano (10/39657) Bank of America v. Farris (17/617783) Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust v. Vance (14/63761) Decided U.S. Bank Na v. Mercado (17/606919) Wells Fargo Bank v. Shaw (17/604222) Case Wells Fargo Bank v. Brown (14/67942) Case Justice C. Randall Hinrichs American Airlines Fed. v. Martin (14/62483) Bayview Loan Servicing v. Ferreira (10/29001) Citimortgage, v. Kelly (14/61639) Case Fed. Nat. Mortgage v. Klein (14/69253) Case Nationastar Mortgage v. Yankwitt (09/33739) Case U.S. Bank Na v. Walsh (13/7732) Case U.S. Bank Trust v. Nieves (14/64243) Case U.S. Bank Trust v. Nieves (14/64243) Denied Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v. Monte (13/18486) Deutsche Bank Nat. v. Nivar (12/6630) Bank of NY v. Serviss (17/658-OT) Justice James Hudson Jp Morgan Chase Bank Nat. v. Johnson (11/35028) Justice John Iliou Schwartz v. Schwartz (03/1312- CM) Denied Mandel v. Mandel (15/1143) Denied Mandel v. Mandel (15/1143) Wright v. Barone (17/3572) Justice Cheryl Joseph Keyes v. Keyes (04/1122-CM) Referred To Hearing Justice John J. Leo Lederer v. Lederer (05/1986-UM) Decided Edery v. Gavrylenk-Edery (17/304- CM) Decided Justice Peter H. Mayer Brown v. Bimson (16/4979) Case Brown v. Mast (16/1773) Case Brown v. Mims (16/829) Case Brown v. Brewster (16/3616) Case Brown v. Cuillo (16/4975) Case Brown v. Daubman (16/5535) Case Brown v. Bedell (16/2672) Denied Brown v. Brady (15/11718) Brown v. Reyes (15/4931) Nationstar Mortgage v. Ordonez (16/607786) NY v. Sepielli (16/606811) Morrow v. Volleyball Official (17/3029) Referred To Morrow v. Volleyball Officials Inc (16/8252) Referred To Bank of NY v. Paredes (08/38924) Justice Denise F. Molia Hampton Domestics v. Davis (14/21492) Harris-Thompson v. Charter School (17/604025) Beneficial Homeowner Service v. Sweeney (16/608310) Referred To Foreclosure Dept

11 nylj.com WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, Sunnybrook v. Town of Southampton (17/3461) Us Bank Nat. Assoc. v. Lange (17/615828) Referred To Foreclosure Dept Justice Glenn Murphy Dubois v. Dubois (13/1338-CM) Referred To Solimo v. Solimo (01/665-CM) Referred To Hearing Lucas v. Lucas (17/282-CM) Referred To Hearing Meehan v. Moucha (05/729-CM) Referred To Hearing Quinones v. Quinones (99/408- CM) Ponce v. Ponce (14/1094-CM) Denied Justice Joseph C. Pastoressa Wilmington Savings Fund v. Alamia (15/608429) Case Wilmington Savings Fund v. Alamia (15/608429) Denied Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust v. Valenzuela (15/608571) Case Asaro v. State Farm (16/600685) Decided Govt. Employees v. Cecala (17/621929) Bayview Loan Servicing v. Guerrero (14/69986) Case Legends At Half Hollow v. Sartorio (16/601884) Manufacturer s And Traders v. Fitzgerald (17/603697) Case Weidenbaum v. Zamel (12/23925) Case Duffy v. Tangen (13/64153) Kobylenski v. Lapidez (17/2018- MV) Lawton v. Wells Fargo Bank (17/3454) Case Lorme v. Chianese (16/615053) Onewest Bank v. Amaya (09/35051) Polovsky v. Darakchiev (15/1721- MM) Wells Fargo Bank v. Lee (16/613801) World Business Lenders v. Michael s Landscaping (16/611675) Charles v. Bob s Discount Furniture (15/15289) Nationstar Mortgage v. Harty (15/605754) O&M Solutions, v. Russo (17/608112) Yautye v. Delorenzo (17/37- OT) Metro. Life Ins. v. Arzu (16/614023) Justice James Quinn Hoffman v. Hoffman (17/24-CM) rtes v. rtes (18/17-CM) Gerhard v. Wroblewski (13/1272- CM) Justice David Reilly Musicwatch v. Interpret (17/624361) Case Justice John Rouse Ocwen Loan Servicing v. Geraci (15/601319) United States urts Southern District Released on: January 22, 2018 Judge Aaron Aguino et al v. AFNI, (17cv03441) J.P. Morgan Securities v. Mariano (17cv01080) on for Local Rule 37.2 J.P. Morgan Securities v. Mariano (17cv01080) Memorandum & Opinion Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Stulz Air Technology Sys (16cv09268) on for Discovery Bridgeforth et al v. City of New York et al (16cv00273) on for Extension of Time Bridgeforth et al v. City of New York et al (16cv00273) Bridgeforth et al v. City of New York et al (16cv00273) Memo Madonna v. Target orate Services, et al (15cv08569) Parra Herrera et al v. 449 Restaurant, et al (15cv06647) Judge Abrams Blink Health Ltd. et al v. MedImpact Healthcare Sy (17cv08880) Protective Doe 1 et al v. Wicked Fashions, et al (17cv08876) Mediation Referral for Cases Filed Under the Girotto v. Rapha Racing et al (17cv05008) on to Adjourn Deas v. Alba Carting & Demolition, Inc et al (17cv03947) on to Dismiss Judge Batts Bixby v. Evine Live, (17cv10131) on for Extension of Time to Answer Pardovani v. Crown Building Maintenance et al (15cv09065) on for Extension of Time to mplete Judge Berman USA v. Grier et al (17cr00461) USA v. Usher et al (17cr00019) Memo USA v. Barnes et al (15cr00288) USA v. John Doe (11cr00632) USA v. lon et al (09cr00330) USA v. lon et al (09cr00330) USA v. Fray (06cr00494) Salomon v. City of New York, et al. (17cv04986) on to Adjourn Moccia v. lvin (16cv04007) Judge Briccetti State Farm Fire & Casualty mpany v. Garrow et al (18cv00436) S & D Liquor, v. Travelers (17cv09949) on for Extension of Time to Amend Hudson Heritage Federal Credit Union v. CUMIS Insu (17cv02930) Memorandum & Opinion Brown et al v. unty of Westchester et al (16cv07610) Memo Parker et al v. Darden et al (16cv06532) Endorsed Letter Betty, v. Pepsi, (16cv04215) on to Seal Document Judge Broderick In Re: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE&quo (00cv01898) Judge Buchwald USA v. Brooks et al (17cr00222) Rabinovits et al v. Apple INC. (17cv10032) on for Extension of Time to Answer Seidman v. x Media Group, (17cv09241) for Initial Pretrial Principal Financial Group, et al v. Bank of A (16cv00592) on to Withdraw as Principal Funds, et al v. Bank of America r (16cv00590) on to Withdraw as City of Philadelphia et al v. Bank of America (15cv08557) on to Withdraw as Prudential Investment Portfolios 2 v. Bank of Amer (15cv07975) on to Withdraw as City of Philadelphia et al v. Barclays Bank Plc et (15cv07972) on to Withdraw as Frost v. The City Of New York et al (15cv04843) Protective Cicchini Enterprises, v. JPMorgan Chase & (15cv04810) on to Withdraw as Axiom Investment Advisors, et al v. Bank Of Am (15cv02973) on to Withdraw as National Asbestos Workers Pension Fund et al v. Ba (15cv01334) on to Withdraw as Goldsleler v. Bank of America Home Loans et al (14cv07720) on to Withdraw as Prudential Investment Portfolios 2 and Prudential (14cv04189) on to Withdraw as Bay Area Toll Authority v. Bank of America ora (14cv03094) on to Withdraw as Federal Deposit Insurance oration as Receiver (14cv01757) on to Withdraw as Darby Financial Products et al v. Barclays Bank PL (13cv08799) on to Withdraw as unty of Mendocino v. Bank of America oration (13cv08644) on to Withdraw as Federal National Mortgage Association v. Barclays (13cv07720) on to Withdraw as National Credit Union Administration Board v. Cred (13cv07394) on to Withdraw as Charles Schwab oration et al v. Bank of Americ (13cv07005) on to Withdraw as The City of Philadelphia v. Bank of America or (13cv06020) on to Withdraw as Principal Financial Group, et al v. Bank of A (13cv06014) on to Withdraw as Principal Funds, et al v. Bank of America r (13cv06013) on to Withdraw as City of Houston v. Bank of America oration et (13cv05616) on to Withdraw as unty of Sacramento v. Bank of America oratio (13cv05569) on to Withdraw as CEMA Joint Venture v. RBS Citizens, N.A. et al (13cv05511) on to Withdraw as San Diego Association of Governments v. Bank of Am (13cv05221) on to Withdraw as unty of Sonoma et al v. Bank of America orat (13cv05187) on to Withdraw as The Regents of the University of California v. Ban (13cv05186) on to Withdraw as The Federal Home Loan Mortgage oration v. Bank (13cv03952) on to Withdraw as Nagel, Stephanie v. Bank of America, N.A. et al (13cv03010) on to Withdraw as Highlander Realty v. Citizens Bank of Massachusett (13cv02343) on to Withdraw as Maragos v. Bank of America oration et al (13cv02297) on to Withdraw as SEIU Pension Plans Master Trust v. Bank Of America (13cv01456) on to Withdraw as Weglarz et al v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al (13cv01198) on to Withdraw as unty of Riverside v. Bank Of America oration (13cv01135) on to Withdraw as Direcors Financial Group v. Bank of America or (13cv01016) on to Withdraw as unty of San Diego v. Bank of America oration (13cv00667) on to Withdraw as City of Richmond et al v. Bank of America orat (13cv00627) on to Withdraw as unty of San Mateo et al v. Bank of America o (13cv00625) on to Withdraw as East Bay Municipal Utility District v. Bank of Ame (13cv00626) on to Withdraw as City of Riverside et al v. Bank of America ora (13cv00597) on to Withdraw as Payne et al v. Bank of America oration et al (13cv00598) on to Withdraw as Guaranty Bank & Trust mpany v. Credit Suisse Gro (13cv00346) on to Withdraw as Earle et al (13cv00407) on to Withdraw as Los Angeles unty Employees Retirement Associatio (13cv00398) on to Withdraw as Adams et al v. Bank of America et al (12cv07461) on to Withdraw as urtyard at Amwell II, et al v. Bank of Ameri (12cv06693) on to Withdraw as Lieberman et al v. Credit Suisse Group AG et al (12cv06056) on to Withdraw as Green Pond Road, v. Bank Of A (12cv05822) on to Withdraw as The Berkshire Bank v. Bank of America oration (12cv05723) on to Withdraw as mmunity Bank & Trust v. Bank of America orat (12cv04205) on to Withdraw as Gelboim v. Credit Suisse Group AG et al (12cv01025) on to Withdraw as Metzler Investment GmbH v. Credit Suisse Group AG (11cv07676) on to Withdraw as City of New Britain Firefighters and Police Benef (11cv07715) on to Withdraw as Schwab Short-Term Bond Market Fund et al v. Bank o (11cv06409) on to Withdraw as Charles Schwab Bank, N.A. et al v. Bank of America (11cv06411) on to Withdraw as Schwab Money Market Fund et al v. Bank of America (11cv06412) on to Withdraw as Trading, v. Bank of America oration (11cv05930) on to Withdraw as Van De Velde v. Bank of America oration et al (11cv06120) on to Withdraw as Atlantic Trading USA, v. BANK OF AMERICA CORP. (11cv05929) on to Withdraw as Calle Gracey v. Bank of America et al (11cv05931) on to Withdraw as NATHANIAL HAYNES v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION et (11cv05927) on to Withdraw as AVP Properties, v. Bank of America oration (11cv05928) on to Withdraw as Mcrmick et al v. Bank of America oration et (11cv05640) on to Withdraw as Hershey v. Credit Suisse Group AG et al (11cv05641) on to Withdraw as Laydon v. Credit Suisse Group AG et al (11cv05638) on to Withdraw as In Re: Libor-Based Financial Instruments Antitrust (11md02262) on to Withdraw as Mayor and City uncil of Baltimore v. Bank of Ame (11cv05450) on to Withdraw as Independence Trading v. Bank of America o (11cv04736) on to Withdraw as Insulators and Asbestos Workers Local #14 v. Bank (11cv03781) on to Withdraw as Ravan Investments, v. Bank of America orat (11cv03249) on to Withdraw as City of Dania Beach Police & Firefighters Retirem (11cv03128) on to Withdraw as Carpenters Pension Fund of West Virginia v. Bank o (11cv02883) on to Withdraw as FTC Capital GMBH et al v. Credit Suisse Group AG e (11cv02613) on to Withdraw as Judge Caproni USA v. Percoco et al (16cr00776) Attia v. Daily et al (18cv00394) to Show Cause American Casualty mpany of Reading, Pennsylvania (18cv00316) for Initial Pretrial Reyes et al v. The Picnic Basket, et al (18cv00140) for Initial Pretrial The New York City District uncil of Carpenters v (17cv09755) on to Adjourn Kenshoo, v. White Shark Media, (17cv09259) O Rourke v. 975 Restaurant et al (17cv08912) Scheduling Parenteau v. Chef Driven Market (17cv08767) Mediation Referral Parenteau v. Chef Driven Market (17cv08767) Case Management Plan Daily News Charities, v. USA Boxing, Metropol (17cv08733) on for Extension of Time to File Resp Vuppala v. Soho Finest Market et al (17cv07704) Memo Royal Park Investments SA/NV v. HSBC Bank USA, Nat (17cv07684) Memo Kimbrew v. Freedome Productions, et al (17cv07190) on for Extension of Time to File Resp Tandem Goods v. Casper Sleep, (17cv06670) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal A. Suarez et al v. Fresh Natural Food et al (17cv05280) Scheduling El Ansari v. New York Presbyterian Hospital et al (17cv03963) Scheduling Caldarera v. International Longshoremen s Associat (17cv01414) on to ntinue Ajala et al v. Home Depot USA, et al (16cv02615) on to Seal Document Phoenix Light SF Limited et al v. The Bank of New (14cv10104) on to Withdraw as Securities and Exchange mmission v. Davis et al (14cv01528) Judge Carter USA v. Shavers (17cr00160) Endorsed Letter USA v. Cabines (16cr00097) USA v. Artis (15cr00865) Athar v. The Museum of Jewish Heritage et al (17cv09491) Referring Case to Delacruz v. St. John s University (17cv09093) Referring Case to Marett v. BBX Sweet Holdings, et al (17cv07789) Stipulation and of Dismissal Xu v. Scialabba et al (17cv04396) on for Extension of Time to Answer Scoca v. Berryhill (17cv01715) on to Remand to Agency Jeffrey P. Weiner Supplemental Trust v. Rio Tinto (16cv09572) Tidewater Investment SRL et al v. Bolivarian Repub (15cv01960) on to Vacate Kodali v. Qin et al (15cv00806) Memo Judge Castel USA v. Brown (17cr00789) USA v. Castillo (17cr00584) Endorsed Letter USA v. Bergstein (16cr00746) Grace v. Sulphur Carriers et al (17cv07522) Case Management Plan The New York Times mpany et al v. U.S. Departmen (17cv01946) for Initial Pretrial Darling Capital, v. Empire Global et al (16cv08943) on to Adjourn Hanks v. Lincoln Life & Annuity mpany of New Yor (16cv06399) Soler v. City of New York Police Department (15cv08687) to Show Cause Sullivan v. Barclays PLC et al (13cv02811) on to Withdraw as Judge te USA v. McFarlane et al (11cr00338) Probation Form nroy et al v. Amos et al (17cv09767) on to Stay nroy et al v. Amos et al (17cv09767) on to Appear Pro Hac Vice Gross v. Rocking J. Ranch, (17cv09377) on to Adjourn DRL Software Solutions, v. Journeypure, (17cv09125) on to Adjourn L.W. v. The City Of New York, et al (17cv08415) Scheduling Guyzar v. GlassesUSA.com (17cv07906) Guyzar v. Executive Gift Shoppe, et al. (17cv07904) United States of America v. The ndominium Board (17cv00361) on for Extension of Time Perez v. Warden (16cv08251) on for Extension of Time to File Resp Knopf v. Phillips, et al. (16cv06601) Li v. Cushman & Wakefield, et al (16cv02484) Securities and Exchange mmission v. Boock et al (09cv08261) on to Vacate United States of America (ex rel), et al v. Westch (06cv02860) Endorsed Letter Judge tt Delacruz v. St. John s University (17cv09093) for Initial Pretrial Lee v. Kylin Management Firm (17cv07249) Lee v. Kylin Management Firm (17cv07249) Memo Burgos et al v. City of New York et al (17cv03454) on for Extension of Time to File Resp derodriguez et al v. Lenox & 132nd Food et a (17cv02439) on for derodriguez et al v. Lenox & 132nd Food et a (17cv02439) Rosner v. United States of America (16cv07256) Murphy v. City of New York et al (16cv04415) on to Stay Murphy v. City of New York et al (16cv04415) on for Local Rule 37.2 United States Of America v. Lacher et al (15cv02572) on for Extension of Time Judge Crotty USA v. Lindenbaum (17cr00106) USA v. Hussain et al (09cr00606) Endorsed Letter Fezzani, et al v. Bear, Stearns &, et al (99cv00793) on for Judge Daniels USA v. Simmonds (17cr00220) Memo Trustees of the Drywall Tapers and Pointers Local (18cv00506) for Initial Pretrial Argo Turboserve oration v. Aero Excel mponen (18cv00489) for Initial Pretrial wan v. United Healthcare Services, et al (18cv00486) for Initial Pretrial Flook (18mc00027) on Application to Change Name on Ro Strike 3 Holdings, v. John Doe (18cv00482) for Initial Pretrial OFF-WHITE v. ^_^WARM HOUSE^_^ STORE, et al. (17cv08872) Notice of Voluntary Dismissal - Signed OFF-WHITE v. ^_^WARM HOUSE^_^ STORE, et al. (17cv08872) Notice of Voluntary Dismissal - Signed OFF-WHITE v. ^_^WARM HOUSE^_^ STORE, et al. (17cv08872) Notice of Voluntary Dismissal - Signed OFF-WHITE v. ^_^WARM HOUSE^_^ STORE, et al. (17cv08872) Notice of Voluntary Dismissal - Signed OFF-WHITE v. ^_^WARM HOUSE^_^ STORE, et al. (17cv08872) Notice of Voluntary Dismissal - Signed OFF-WHITE v. ^_^WARM HOUSE^_^ STORE, et al. (17cv08872) Notice of Voluntary Dismissal - Signed McEachron v. Petsmart, (16cv08472) Memo mmerzbank AG v. Bank of New York Mellon (15cv10029) on to Withdraw as Sonterra Capital Master Fund Ltd. et al v. UBS AG (15cv05844) on to Withdraw as Laydon v. Mizuho Bank, Ltd. et al (12cv03419) on to Withdraw as Judge Davison Trustees of the Laborers International Union of N (17cv05936) Memo Marri Furk v. Orange-Ulster Boces, et al (15cv06594) on for Extension of Time Judge Engelmayer USA v. Hurdle, Jr. (16cr00015) Memo The New York Times mpany et al v. Office of the (18cv00369) for Initial Pretrial Cappiello v. Petco Animal Supplies Stores, (18cv00312) for Initial Pretrial Canga v. Sumitomo oration of Americas (17cv09921) of Discontinuance O Rourke v. Sushi Gama et al (17cv09467) on for Extension of Time to Answer Parenteau v. Luxury Living of New York, et al (17cv08877) for Initial Pretrial Victor Lopez v. B & H Foto & Electronics (17cv08750) for Initial Pretrial Oorah, v. Kane Kessler, P.C. et al (17cv07175) on to Adjourn Vuppala v. Hampton Chutney, et al (17cv05001) on to Reopen Case Norris v. NY mmunity Financial, et al (17cv03976) on for Extension of Time Trustees of the Hollow Metal Pension Fund et al v. (17cv03277) on for Extension of Time to mplete Olam Insurance Limited v. M.V. Berlin Express et a (17cv03130) on for Extension of Time UMB Bank, National Association v. Airplanes Limite (16cv07717) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Axiom Retail Interiors Ltd. v. IBEX nstruction C (16cv06320) on for Miller v. New York City Department of Education, e (16cv04466) Amended Referring Case to Danino v. National Stores et al (15cv09627) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Farrell v. Bolte et al (15cv08401) INTL FCStone Markets v. Ceagro Agricola LTDA (15cv08263) Memo Judge Failla USA v. Daly et al (17cr00118) of Referral to Probation for Presentence Inv USA v. Amaro (16cr00848) USA v. Lavin et al (15cr00667) Walker v. The City of New York et al (17cv09414) of Service Globerunners Incorporated v. Denfeld Packing, (17cv08863) on to Adjourn Richard Baldelli v. Abigail Kirsch At Tappan Hill (17cv08056) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Marzullo v. Karmic Release Ltd. (17cv07482) to Show Cause Thomas v. United States of America (17cv06877) to Answer Butler v. Suria (17cv03077) Memo Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance mpany v. Hamilton (17cv02350) Scheduling Galindo v. East unty Louth et al (16cv09149) Judge Forrest USA v. Sweet (18cr00008) to Unseal Information USA v. Sweet (18cr00008) USA v. Susana et al (17cr00495) USA v. Shulaya (17cr00350) USA v. Shulaya (17cr00350) USA v. Robinson et al (16cr00447) Endorsed Letter USA v. Omar Adonis Guzman- Martinez (16cr00418) Memo USA v. Flowers (16cr00317) Judgment USA v. Wedd et al (15cr00616) for Forfeiture of Property USA v. Bowen et al (07cr00961) Memorandum & Opinion Soltis v. Berryhill (18cv00490) Strike 3 Holdings, v. John Doe (18cv00477) for Initial Pretrial Malibu Media, v. Doe (17cv09135) District uncil No. 9 International Union of Pain (17cv09098) for Initial Pretrial Genger v. Genger (17cv08181) Referring Case to Magistrate Judge Hand v. Security USA, (17cv07990) Scheduling Williams v. The City of New York et al (17cv05676) Velasquez v. BGHO et al (17cv04939) Tutor Perini Building v. The District unci (17cv03765) Scheduling Timoshenko v. Gu (17cv02268) Scheduling Rivera v. Home Depot U.S.A, (16cv07552) on for Extension of Time to File Resp Rivera v. Home Depot U.S.A, (16cv07552) on for Extension of Time to File Pinhasov v. United States of America (16cv07349) Memorandum & Opinion Ginastra et al v. Malaysia Airlines Berhad et al (16cv05662) Memo Norman v. United States of America (16cv03053) Memorandum & Opinion Lee v. Sutton Garage,, et al. (15cv05460) Judge Fox Mango v. Buzzfeed, (17cv06784) Ruiz v. mmissioner of Social Security (17cv02147) on for Extension of Time Judge Freeman Equinox Gallery Limited v. Dorfman et al (17cv00230) on for Local Rule 37.2 Hoven v. The City of New York et al (16cv02080) Wood et al v. Mutual Redevelopment Houses, et (14cv07535) on for Discovery Judge Furman USA v. Chait (17cr00105) Almazo et al v. Rachel On Ninth et al (17cv08324) on to Adjourn Ochoa Perez et al v. Garden Organic Dry Cleaners I (17cv07542) on to Adjourn lumbu et al v. Dubblee Media et al (17cv06015) on for Extension of Time Sullivan et al v. Spandex House, et al (17cv05929) Reopening Case Arrojo v. BB Management of New York et al (17cv04625) Stone Key Partners et al v. Monster Worldwide, (17cv03851) on to Amend/rrect Stone Key Partners et al v. Monster Worldwide, (17cv03851) on for Extension of Time to mplete Washington v. Walgreens et al (17cv02393) on for Extension of Time to mplete Garcia v. City Of New York et al (16cv06903) on for Extension of Time Judge Gardephe USA v. Johnson (16cr00281) of Referral to Probation for Presentence Inv Judge Gorenstein E.G. on behalf of M.G. v. New York City Department (18cv00108) on for Extension of Time to Answer Daniels v. Jean Pierre Hair Salon, Incorporated (17cv01399) Leidig et al v. Buzzfeed, (16cv00542) on for Extension of Time to File Resp Crowhurst v. Szczucki et al (16cv00182) on for Protective Brown et al v. The City of New York et al (15cv04091) Memo Judge Hellerstein Stephen M. Smith & mpany, CPA s, v. Williams (17cv07063) Case Management Plan Vereit, v. Schorsch, et al. (17cv06546) on to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction Goodfella4life Ent. v. Pope et al (17cv05098) Memo rson v. Brown Harris Stevens Of The Hamptons, LL (16cv00545) Endorsed Letter Wunsch v. American Realty Capital Properties, (15cv02934) Memo In re American Realty Capital Properties, Li (15mc00040) Memo In re American Realty Capital Properties, Li (15mc00040) Memo In re American Capital Realties Litigation (15cv00421) Memo In re American Capital Realties Litigation (14cv10134) Memo Froehner v. Schorsch et al (14cv09444) on to Withdraw as In re American Capital Realties Litigation (14cv09006) Memo In re American Capital Realties Litigation (14cv08740) Memo In re American Capital Realties Litigation (14cv08721) Memo In re American Capital Realties Litigation (14cv08671) Memo In re American Capital Realties Litigation (14cv08671) Memo In re American Capital Realties Litigation (14cv08659) Memo In re American Capital Realties Litigation (14cv08659) Memo In re American Capital Realties Litigation (14cv08669) Memo In re American Capital Realties Litigation (14cv08668) Memo Asencio et al v. Verizon New York, (06cv02039) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal In Re: World Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster (21mc00102) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Judge Kaplan USA v. Kim et al (16cr00405) Parisienne v. 4ntrol Media, (17cv10076) for Initial Pretrial Institutional Investor v. Omni Development and (17cv08497) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Riverkeeper, v. Titan ncrete, (17cv07523) Scheduling Trustees of the Drywall Tapers and Pointers Local (17cv04467) Memo IN RE CPI CARD GROUP INC. SECURI- TIES LITIGATION (16cv04531) Voronina et al v. Scores Holding mpany, et (16cv02477) Scheduling Nesbit v. City Of New York et al (16cv00576) Writ of Habeas us ad Testificandum Issued Nesbit v. City Of New York et al (16cv00576) on in Limine Nesbit v. City Of New York et al (16cv00576) Judge Karas USA v. Kinyon et al (16cr00666) USA v. Scott et al. (16cr00626) Memo s continued on next page»

12 32 WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2018 nylj.com urt s United States urts Southern District «ntinued from previous page USA v. Vulaj (16cr00420) Endorsed Letter Baez v. Karp Scarsdale, et al (17cv09964) on for Extension of Time to Answer Benreuben v. Hinkson et al (17cv09744) of Service Lewis v. Ellen et al (17cv08101) Memo Cameron v. Sandor et al (17cv07699) of Dismissal Craig v. Doe #1 et al (17cv06373) on for Extension of Time to Answer Craig v. Doe #1 et al (17cv06373) Antrobus v. Dapecevic et al (17cv05840) Memo Whitley v. NYSDOCCS et al (17cv03652) Memo Whitley v. Bowden et al (17cv03564) Whitley v. Bowden et al (17cv03564) Memo Falls v. Pitt et al (16cv08863) Memo Wood v. C.O. P. Byrd, et al. (16cv08142) of Service Wood v. C.O. P. Byrd, et al. (16cv08142) Memo Wellcome v. Germano et al (16cv05361) on to Appear Pro Hac Vice Johnson v. Doty et al (15cv07823) Scheduling Lebron v. Mrzyglod et al (14cv10290) Memo Laporte v. Keyser et al (14cv08293) Memo Melvin v. unty of Westchester et al (14cv02995) Memo Albritton v. Morris et al (13cv03708) Memo Judge Keenan Lapeyre Stair, v. United Structural Works, I (18cv00458) for Initial Pretrial Meer Enterprises, v. Kocak et al (18cv00006) Memo Cengage Learning, et al v. Wang et al (17cv04914) Judgment - Default Hayles v. Aspen Properties Group, et al (16cv08919) of Discontinuance Bernacchi v. Investment Technology Group, et (15cv06369) Protective Judge Koeltl Payano v Popham, et al (17cv09983) Stipulation and Langhorn v. Oasis Outsourcing ntract II, et (17cv08182) Mediation Referral Vuppala v. Olga Street Ltd et al (17cv07702) on to Adjourn Swartz v. West 44th Street Hotel (17cv07103) on for Extension of Time to Answer Kallinger, v. The mbined Book Exhibit, (17cv07012) on to Adjourn Fullerton v. Montefiore Medical Center (17cv04913) on for Extension of Time to mplete The 32BJ North Pension Fund and its Board of Trust (17cv04596) on to Appear Pro Hac Vice lors in Optics, Ltd. v. Oakley, (17cv04046) on for Extension of Time Jiang v. Neufeld et al (17cv03978) Stipulation and of Dismissal Gonzalez v. The City of New York et al (17cv01824) Scheduling Gonzalez v. The City of New York et al (17cv01824) on for Extension of Time to mplete Barrera et al v. Queens Dollar, et al (17cv01565) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Vega v. HSBC Securities USA et al (16cv09424) on for Schwab v. E Trade Financial oration et al (16cv05891) Memorandum & Opinion Martinez Lopez et al v. Spoto s Restaurant e (16cv04009) on for Extension of Time Gym Door Repairs, et al v. Young Equipment Sa (15cv04244) Clerk Krajick United States Fire v. Swiss Rein (18cv00401) Judgment - Clerk Lugo v. mmissioner of Social Security (17cv05630) Judgment - Clerk Leung v. mmissioner of Social Security (17cv02703) Judgment - Clerk Kuchenmeister v. lvin (16cv07975) Judgment - Clerk Schwab v. E Trade Financial oration et al (16cv05891) Judgment - Clerk Sara Designs, v. A Classic Time Watch Inc (16cv03638) Judgment - Clerk Fernandez v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance mp (16cv02533) Judgment - Clerk Laurent v. Pricewaterhouseopers LLP et al (06cv02280) Judgment - Clerk Judge Lehrburger USA v. Sweet (18cr00008) USA v. Komito (18mj00009) Oral Ward v. Sinovision Incorporated (17cv02931) on for Horton v. Farmers Insurance Exchange et al (17cv00894) Guadalupe v. The City Of New York, et al (15cv00220) Blutreich v. North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health (13cv08583) Wilson et al v. Pasquale s Damarino s, et al (10cv02709) Wilson et al v. Pasquale s Damarino s, et al (10cv02709) Case Management Plan Judge Marrero Verragio Ltd. v. Verma (18cv00141) on to Appear Pro Hac Vice Shulman v. Chaitman LLP et al (17cv09330) Endorsed Letter Langley v. New Tang Dynasty Television, et a (17cv09016) Endorsed Letter Judge Mccarthy USA v. Bradshaw (18mj00472) Vogel v. Experian et al (17cv06613) Scheduling Vogel v. Experian et al (17cv06613) White Plains Housing Authority v. BP Products Nort (17cv06250) Scheduling White Plains Housing Authority v. BP Products Nort (17cv06250) Campa v. Energy Nuclear Operations (17cv00792) Scheduling Miller et al., v. Hyundai Motor America (15cv04722) Scheduling Perez v. Orange unty Sheriff s Department et al (14cv08465) Writ of Habeas us ad Testificandum Issued Perez v. Orange unty Sheriff s Department et al (14cv08465) Miller et al., v. Hyundai Motor America (12cv03072) Scheduling Judge Mcmahon USA v. Apestegui et al (12cr00601) Memo USA v. Boykin et al (10cr00391) Memo 1:18-mc CM Miscellaneous Case Administrative Closing Pullin v. Greystone Programs et al (18cv00438) Granting IFP Application McChriston v. Debt Recovery Solutions (18cv00188) Granting IFP Application Ramirez et al v. New York City/ Department of rre (17cv10171) Directing Payment of Fee or IFP Application Smith v. Westchester unty Jail (17cv09858) Granting IFP Application in Prisoner Case Ben-Reuben v. Westchester unty et al (17cv09156) Directing Prisoner Authorization Felix v. United States of America (17cv06813) Endorsed Letter Nana v. LE Viking et al (17cv00928) on for Default Judgment Bangkok Bangkok Import & Export v. Jamtan Afr (16cv02657) on for Extension of Time N.V. et al v. New York City Department Of Educatio (16cv00525) on for Discovery Soto v. NYC Department of Citywide Administrative (15cv07711) on for Leave to File Excess Pages Judge Moses USA v. Montijo (17cr00518) for Forfeiture of Property Stinson v. The City Of New York, et al (18cv00027) for Initial Pretrial Li v. The Bank of New York Mellon (17cv06536) N Diaye v. Metropolitan Life Insurance mpany (17cv04260) on to mpel BBK Tobacco & Foods, LLP v. 7th St Village Farm In (17cv04079) Memo Miller v. New York City Department of Education, e (16cv04466) Whittington v. Ponte et al (16cv01152) Roundtree v. NYPD et al (15cv07255) on to Adjourn Roundtree v. D.O.C. et al (15cv06583) on to Adjourn Judge Nathan USA v. Otanes-Sanchez (17cr00612) Memo USA v. Almonte et al (17cr00440) USA v. Burrell et al (15cr00095) Memo USA v. Burrell et al (15cr00095) Judgment USA v. Burrell et al (15cr00095) Judgment Mendizabal v. David s Bridal, et al (17cv09494) of Discontinuance Wakup v. Macy s et al (17cv08697) Notice of Voluntary Dismissal - Signed Ayler v. Maggies Paratransit et al (17cv08066) on to ntinue S. et al v. The City of New York (17cv07661) Protective S. et al v. The City of New York (17cv07661) Memo Young v. Caleres, et al (17cv07466) Carrasco v. Miller (17cv07434) Memo Santana v. Weill rnell Primary Care (17cv07420) Scheduling Perry v. The Prudential Insurance mpany of Ameri (17cv06955) on to Transfer Case Lin et al v. Kelly et al (17cv04841) to Show Cause Potter v. US Department of Health and Human Servic (17cv04141) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Aguino et al v. AFNI, (17cv03441) Referring Case to Magistrate Judge Marshall v. United States Of America (17cv02951) on for Leave to File Excess Pages The New York Times mpany et al v. Bureau of Alco (17cv02144) HDI Global SE v. Mediterranean Shipping mpany S. (16cv07654) of Discontinuance A Partner Limited v. ntour Acquisition Group LL (16cv06575) Feliz v. City Of New York et al (16cv05261) Memo Murphy v. City of New York et al (16cv04415) Desinor v. Mejia et al (14cv10042) Protective Hewitt v. Metro-North mmuter Railroad (14cv08052) on to Amend/rrect Rogers v. Fashion Institute of Technology et al (14cv06420) Soto v. The unty of Westchester et al (08cv05066) Memorandum & Opinion Judge Netburn L.W. v. The City Of New York, et al (17cv08415) Referring Case to L.W. v. The City Of New York, et al (17cv08415) L.W. v. The City Of New York, et al (17cv08415) Nurlybayev v. ZTO Express (Cayman) et al (17cv06130) on to Appear Pro Hac Vice RLI et al v. Expeditors Internat (17cv05549) Trustees Of The New York City District uncil Of (17cv03705) for Initial Pretrial Velasquez v. Gortaroe nstruction of New York, In (17cv03629) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Dry v. Berryhill (17cv01254) Report and Recommendations Salcedo v. City of New York et al (17cv00659) Norman v. lvin (17cv00470) Stipulation and Garcia v. Banks (16cv08370) rtes Pacheco et al v. Webster Cafe et al (16cv08265) Almodovar v. lvin (16cv07419) Report and Recommendations Trustees of the Elevator nstructors Union Local (16cv07408) Phillips v. Field Home-Holy mforter (16cv06723) Mendez et al v. K & Y Peace et al (16cv05562) Jenny Yoo llection, v. David s Bridal, (16cv02647) Lim v. K & Y Peace et al (16cv02624) Solomatina v. Mikelic et al (16cv02446) N.V. et al v. New York City Department Of Educatio (16cv00525) Mowatt v. New York City Department Of rrections (15cv10104) The Federal Savings Bank v. ACE Watanasuparp et al (15cv03548) Royal Park Investments SA/NV v. Wells Fargo Bank, (14cv09764) on to Stay Flores et al v. Eastern Farms, et al (13cv08592) to Show Cause Montefiore Medical Center v. Teamsters Local, 272 (09cv03096) Judge Oetken Doe et al v. Riverdale untry School et al (17cv09537) on for Extension of Time Doe et al v. Riverdale untry School et al (17cv09537) Pharmathen, S.A. v. Lachman nsultant Services, I (17cv09127) on to Adjourn Louis Dreyfus Citrus, v. Maersk Line A/S et (17cv08103) Case Management Plan Alejandro v. mmissioner of Social Security (17cv02906) The Medical Society of the State of New York et al (16cv05265) on for Local Rule 37.2 Guerrero v. City Of New York et al (16cv00516) Stipulation and of Dismissal Pablo Star Ltd. v. The Welsh Government et al (15cv01167) Memo JD2 Enviornmental, v. Endurance American Insu (14cv08888) Memo Jimenez v. Graham (11cv06468) Lifting Stay Judge Parker Escamilla et al v. Kimnam, et al (17cv03512) Torres v. Ecco 124 Chambers et al (17cv02202) Memo Francisco Alcocer Castro et al v. BNP NY Foods, In (17cv00242) Admitting Pro Hac Vice Judge Pauley USA v. Montero (17cr00578) Judgment hen v. New Moosejaw, et al (17cv09391) for Initial Pretrial hen v. NaviStone, et al (17cv09389) on for hen v. NaviStone, et al (17cv09389) for Initial Pretrial hen v. Casper Sleep et al (17cv09325) on for hen v. Casper Sleep et al (17cv09325) for Initial Pretrial Rice v. Sutton New Media (17cv08332) on to Adjourn Securities and Exchange mmission v. Meadlin et a (17cv02752) Need a smart Expert Witness? ALMExperts has leaders in every discipline on to Withdraw as Tapia Villa et al v. Marketplace 41, et al (16cv03200) of Dismissal Estate of James Oscar Smith et al v. Cash Money Re (14cv02703) on for Extension of Time Judge Peck USA v. Middendorf et al (18cr00036) to Unseal Indictment Hernandez v. Superintendent, xsackie rrectiona (17cv02457) Report and Recommendations Judge Pitman USA v. Romero Astudilla (18mj00468) Appointing Public Defender USA v. Arroyo (18mj00321) Appointing Public Defender USA v. Arroyo (18mj00321) Oral USA v. Williams (17mj09580) Endorsed Letter USA v. Carpio Objio (17mj09419) to ntinue - Interest of Justice USA v. Salas (17mj09376) to ntinue - Interest of Justice USA v. Landau (17mj09353) to ntinue - Interest of Justice USA v. Williams, et al (17mj09151) to ntinue - Interest of Justice USA v. Jaata (17mj08709) Endorsed Letter USA v. Nesmith, et al (17mj08605) to ntinue - Interest of Justice USA v. Irving (17cr00516) of Referral to Probation for Presentence Inv USA v. Anderson (17mj05542) to ntinue - Interest of Justice USA v. Khan (17mj05290) to ntinue - Interest of Justice Eaton & Van Winkle, LLP v. Ren et al (17cv06118) Endorsed Letter Dykes v. City of New York et al (17cv03592) on to Adjourn Amhaz v. Booking.com (USA) et al (17cv02120) Memo BMaddox Enterprises v. Milad Oskouie, Osko M L (17cv01889) Memo Ren v. The Plan Administrator of the Eaton & Van W (17cv01535) Endorsed Letter Jude et al v. The City of New York et al (17cv01127) Kuchenmeister v. lvin (16cv07975) Memorandum & Opinion Kilroy v. Mason Tenders District uncil Welfare (16cv03378) on to Adjourn Judge Preska USA v. Erazo-Ayala et al (16cr00167) of Referral to Probation for Presentence Inv Villegas Andino v. mmissioner of Social Security (18cv00523) Standing re s for Judgment on the Plea Amelia D. Rose obo Xavier Georgeverly Taylor Ander (18cv00509) Standing re s for Judgment on the Plea Soltis v. Berryhill (18cv00490) Standing re s for Judgment on the Plea Sream v. SC of Upstate NY (17cv09720) Notice of Voluntary Dismissal - Signed Athar v. The Museum of Jewish Heritage et al (17cv09491) of Automatic Referral to Mediation Chevrestt v. American Media, (17cv07729) Memo Irizarry v. LaClair (17cv00739) Memo Bainbridge Fund LTD. v. The Republic of Argentina (16cv08665) Stipulation and Bainbridge Fund LTD v. The Republic of Argentina (16cv08605) Stipulation and Mcy v. The City of New York et al (16cv03793) Memo Medina v. Buther et al (15cv01955) Memo Spotnana, Inc v. American Talent Agency, Inc et al (09cv03698) Gramercy Argentina Opportunity Fund, LTD. et al v. (08cv04814) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Gramercy Emerging Markets Fund, LTD. et al v. The (08cv01113) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Gramercy Emerging Markets Fund, LTD. et al v. The (08cv01113) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Dralli et al v. The Republic of Argentina (07cv04606) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Dralli et al v. The Republic of Argentina (07cv04606) of Dismissal In Re: Digital Music Antitrust Litigation (06md01780) Memo Puricelli v. The Republic of Argentina (04cv02117) Chorny v. The Republic of Argentina (04cv02118) Azza et al v. The Republic of Argentina (04cv01085) Valls et al v. The Republic of Argentina (04cv00937) Hickory Securities Ltd. v. The Republic of Argenti (04cv00936) Castro v. The Republic of Argentina (04cv00746) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Castro v. Republic of Argentina (04cv00506) Seijas et al v. The Republic Of Argentina (04cv00401) Seijas et al v. The Republic Of Argentina (04cv00400) Judge Ramos Girand v. LiveTiles, et al (17cv09005) on for Extension of Time Al-Martin et al v. Luxe Valet (17cv06286) on for Extension of Time to File MacAlister v. Millennium Hotels & Resorts et al (17cv06189) on for Henry v. Morgan s Hotel Group, (15cv01789) Memorandum & Opinion Judge Roman rcia v. Barclays Bank Delaware et al (17cv01751) on for Judge Schofield Reed v. Nike, et al (17cv07575) Memo Wilmington Trust, N.A. v Realty Owner, (17cv07081) Memo Davis et al v. Bristol-Myers Squibb et al (17cv06750) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, v. U (17cv06390) on for Extension of Time Gumora v. New York City Dept. of rrections et al (17cv02300) Daniels v. Jean Pierre Hair Salon, Incorporated (17cv01399) on to Adjourn Kassman v. KPMG LLP (11cv03743) Memo Judge Seibel Nunez et al v. Kas s Bar & Restaruant et al (17cv09279) on for Extension of Time Lucente v. Nationwide Credit, (17cv08828) on for Extension of Time to File Resp General Electric mpany v. Gas Turbine ntrols C (17cv07188) on to Adjourn Can t Stop Productions, v. Sixuvus, Ltd. et (17cv06513) Memo Yentzer v. Strumpf et al (17cv05362) on for Macias v. Daniel (17cv02427) Stipulation and of Dismissal Galanin v. Estate Motors, et al (16cv08674) Memo Sheet Metal Workers International Association Loca (16cv08315) on to Appear Pro Hac Vice Nissan Motor Acceptance oration v. Nissan Lift (16cv07852) Memo Judge Smith Saunders v. Griffin (17cv08683) Illescas v. Griffin (17cv05385) Lifting Stay Falls v. Campbell et al (17cv00035) on for Discovery Kristy Rella v. Westchester BMW, et al (16cv00916) Stipulation and Kristy Rella v. Westchester BMW, et al (16cv00916) Stipulation and Kristy Rella v. Westchester BMW, et al (16cv00916) Protective Judge Stein Medical Imaging v. Partners Imaging Holdings (17cv08495) Satco Incorporated et al v. Gas Turbine ntrols C (16cv09715) Sonterra Capital Master Fund Ltd. v. Credit Suisse (15cv00871) on for Extension of Time In Re: CitiGroup Bond Action Litigation (08cv09522) on to Approve Judge Sullivan Doncouse v. K & M Camera et al (17cv08911) Marks v. Health Line One, (17cv08779) for Initial Pretrial Danneman v. Gerszberg (17cv08019) to Show Cause CityR Group Holdings Limited Liability mpany et (17cv07850) on for Extension of Time to mplete Oakley v. Dolan et al (17cv06903) on to Withdraw as Oakley v. Dolan et al (17cv06903) Memo Aburus v. Unite Here Health (17cv06794) In Re Application of GORSOAN LIM- ITED and GAZPROMBA (17cv05912) Memo Affiliated FM Insurance et al v. M/V Uni-Arden (17cv05738) for Initial Pretrial Lugo v. mmissioner of Social Security (17cv05630) Stipulation and UCB Pharma GmbH v. Hapag-LLoyd AG et al (17cv05568) for Initial Pretrial Delcor Asset oration et al v. Taro Pharmaceuti (17cv05405) Memo Jeffries v. Fullbeauty Brands Holdings oration (17cv05099) on to Appear Pro Hac Vice Klauber Brothers, v. The Dress Barn (17cv04665) Protective Klauber Brothers, v. The Dress Barn (17cv04665) Robles, Jr. v. The City Of New York, et al (17cv04037) Stipulation and of Dismissal Energy Intelligence Group, et al v. ING Capit (16cv08324) of Dismissal Dhir v. Carlyle Group Employee et al (16cv06378) on for Leave to File Document Uddin v. O Brien Restaurant Holding mpany, e (16cv02098) on for Leave to File Document Securities and Exchange mmission v. Durante (15cv09874) Memo PRL USA Holdings, v. United States Polo Assoc (14cv00764) Stipulation and of Dismissal ONE SOURCE that includes: Judge Swain USA v. llado (14cr00731) Memo USA v. llado (14cr00731) Memo USA v. llado (14cr00731) Memo USA v. llado (14cr00731) Memo USA v. llado (14cr00731) Memo USA v. llado (14cr00731) Memo USA v. Calderon et al (08cr01241) Calliph-Amillcar-Bey: Wilson- El v. Vance Jr. (17mc00493) of Dismissal VSL Dokumentikos Namai v. The New York Times mpa (17cv07139) of Dismissal Leung v. mmissioner of Social Security (17cv02703) Adopting Report and Recommendations Premier Health Center P.C. v. Curemd.com et a (17cv01861) Microbanc, v. InspireMD, (16cv03860) Memorandum & Opinion Sara Designs, v. A Classic Time Watch Inc (16cv03638) Allen v. Walsh (09cv05832) Endorsed Letter Judge Sweet Ferring Pharmaceuticals et al v. Serenity Pha (17cv09922) Trustees of the New York City District uncil of (17cv09676) Setting Hearing on Judge Torres USA v. Bolding (17cr00660) of Referral to Probation for Presentence Inv USA v. Gregory (17cr00514) USA v. Garcia (15cr00408) USA v. Sanchez (15cr00128) Fontoine v. The Permanent Mission of Chile to the (17cv10086) of Service Fontoine v. The Permanent Mission of Chile to the (17cv10086) Referring Case to Morales et al v. Motorino East Village et al (17cv09236) on to Adjourn Martin et al v. Liberty Moving & Storage, (17cv08517) to Show Cause Best Made Resources, v. Today- Tix, et al (17cv06827) of Dismissal Laboratoires Majorelle SAS et al v. Apricus Biosci (17cv06625) on to Appear Pro Hac Vice Laboratoires Majorelle SAS et al v. Apricus Biosci (17cv06625) on to Appear Pro Hac Vice Creative Furniture Solutions, v. Liberty Mutua (17cv06548) GRP Funding,LLP et al v. GRP mpanies, et a (17cv06516) Endorsed Letter A. Hartrodt (USA), v. Alno USA oration (17cv05829) James Edwards v. Hearst mmunications, (15cv09279) on for Leave to File Document Clones Investment, v. The People s Insurance C (15cv08649) Boelter et al v. Hearst mmunications, et al (15cv03934) on for Leave to File Document China Shipping ntainer Lines Ltd. v. Big Por (15cv02006) Memo Shasha et al v. Malkin et al (14cv09989) Judge Wood USA v. Almonte et al (16cr00670) The Port Authority Police Benevolent Association, (15cv03526) Judge Woods Freedom Cruises, v. City Of New York et al (18cv00296) Stipulation and of Voluntary Dismissal Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance, Ltd. v. Kuehne + Na (18cv00202) for Initial Pretrial Boves v. Aaron s, et al (18cv00005) for Initial Pretrial Zhong et al v. Royal Siam Restaurant, Inc et al (17cv10240) Mediation Referral for Cases Filed Under the Brown v. Brightpoint Health (17cv09324) Case Management Plan Norman v. Minotti S.P.A (17cv08967) Goldstein Family Partnership, LP v. Q Lotus, (17cv08964) Memo Vazquez v. N and D Restaurant of NY et al (17cv08906) for Initial Pretrial Harris v. Berryhill (17cv08824) Marks v. Ideal Health Benefits, (17cv08773) Case Management Plan Castro et al v. Derose et al (17cv07290) of Discontinuance Nardoni v. City Of New York et al (17cv02695) Memo CVS Pharmacy, et al v. Press America, (17cv00190) on for Discovery Over 15,000 top medical and technical experts in more than 4,000 areas of expertise, covering all 50 States.

13 mpliance /17 Rubinstein v. hen /06 Apostol v. Jewish Board of Family /08 Bland v. Stolbach /11 Bledsoe v. Center For Human Reprod.ion 3: /16 Herdlinger v. Brayman 2: /14 Hunter v. Habib /14 Laan v. Schweiger 10: /17 Schaaff v. Antonacci /16 Weiner v. Jaber 2: /09 Wierzba v. St. Luke s Roosevelt Hosp. 9:30 Pretrial /09 Casis v. New York- Presbyterian /13 Darren Raefski As v. Hirsch 11: /16 Herdlinger v. Brayman 2: /15 Lorans v. Central Park Medical /14 Madison v. Simon /04 Mullay v. Gagne /14 Salik v. Metro. Dental 4: /10 Santana v. Paciuc 10: /14 Schwartz v. Goldsmith 11: /13 Shapiro v. Errico 10:30 E-Filed /17 Crivici v. NYU Hosps. Center 9: /15 Mastro v. Kaye 9:30 Part 12 Justice Barbara Jaffe Phone Room 341 This is a Paperless Part. No Working pies Accepted /14 Arreaga v. 112 Dyckman Restaurant 2: /16 Brignol v. Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen Inc 2:15 Preliminary /17 Guzman v. Holt nst. 2: /17 Harry v. Custom Protective Services 2: /17 Joiner v. 5 Beekman Prop. Owner 2: /16 Jones v. City Elevator 2: /17 Kramer Electric v. yle ntracting 2: /17 Luo v. Boss Dental Pc 2: /15 Nationwide Registry v. J. Ryans 2: /17 Pacheco v. St. Augustine Apts. 2: /17 Panter v. McKenna 2: /17 Valbuena v. Snowplow Lh 2:15 Status /14 Matza v. NYC 2:15 mpliance /17 Alcon Builders Group v. Gramercy Palace / F/k/a 2: /16 Alvarado v. Boston Properties, 2: /16 Alvarez v. 140 West St. (NY). 2: /15 Brusati v. Black Tree Restaurant 2: /16 Caceres v. Bldg 44 Developers 2: /15 hen v. 337 East 33rd 2: /16 Ermenegildo Zegna v. L&M 825 2: /16 Gardner v. peland 2: /14 Gonzalez v West 175 St. 2: /15 Hertz Vehicles v. Regency Healthcare Medical 2: /15 Jose v. Helen Mills Event Space And 2: /16 Kubersky v. Cameron Industries, 2: /17 Laguerre v. Eltech Industries, 2: /16 Lara v. Seward Park Housing 2: /15 Lynch v. Shea mmunications 2: /14 Madkins v. 22 Little West 12th St. 2: /15 Maldonado v. NYC Educational 2: /17 Marin v. Rxr nst. 2: /15 McBroom v. NYC 2: /16 Ouimette v. Ery Tenant 2: /17 Ramirez v. Fedcap Rehabilitation 2: /16 Rutkowski v. Mount Sinai Hosp. 2: /16 Schrader v. Lichter Real Estate Number 2: /16 Tsc 2012 v. Adelhardt nst. 2: /16 Vega v. 60 Hudson Owner 2: /13 Arana-Grant v East 2nd Owners /17 rnell Apts. v. NYC Dept. 9: /17 Faltings v. O Neill 9: /17 Gopie v. O Neill /17 Grady v. Hessert Rlty. L.P /17 Hibu, F/k/a Yellowbook v. Jp Morgan Chase Bank 10: /17 Holy Trinity Cathedral v. Srinivasan 10: /17 Mazario v. Snitow Kanfer Holtzer /17 Ohakamnu v. NYC Dept. of /17 Whidbee v. NYCHA E-Filed /17 Banco Popular North America v. Antibes Taxi /16 Reiser v. Sutton Manor Apts., Part 17 Justice Shlomo S. Hagler Phone urtroom 335 E-Filing Part /15 NYC v. in The Matter of The /16 Suckling v. Iu 11 Status /14 NYC v. in The Matter of The /11 Nrz Pass-Through Trust IV v. Francoise Rouge /11 Nrz Pass-Through Trust IV v. Francoise Rouge 2:15 Preliminary /17 Carumba v. Chaffetz As mmissioner /16 Dyer v. NYC /17 Green v. Associated Cut Flower /16 Karantzoulis v. NYU Langone Medical Center /17 Levy v. Starbucks /17 Michaud v. Flanagan /17 Molina v. Loft 124 ndominium /14 Paykin v. Xcentric Ventures /16 Pezzullo v. 631 Edgecombe /15 Rising Sun nst. v. Rhodes /16 Scott v. NYC /16 Sellecchia v. Magna Hosp.ity Group L.C /17 Siegel v. 241/37 Rlty. Group 11 Status / Water Rlty.. v. Imobile of NYC /16 Ackerman v. Staples The Office /13 Adames v. 55 Fee /16 Ballard v. 348 West /14 Banks v. Peace of Mind Rlty /16 Baram v. Person /15 Bessen v. Avsit, A/k/a Avsitech /16 Calicin v. Lee /12 Camacho v. NYC 2: /14 Capasso v. 60 Broad St /14 hlan v. Richmond Shepard Theatre /16 Dixon v. Central Harlem Plaza /16 Dondero v. Church of The Holy Cross /14 Figueroa v. NYCHA /15 Great Northern Ins. v. Interior Mgt., /15 Harris v. NYCHA /13 Hayne v. llister /13 Jupin-Bean v. Wolski Wood Works, /15 Liu v. Safon /16 Morales v. Heywood Towers /15 Palafox Ayala v th /13 Rachmuth v. Gersten Savage /16 Sayegh v. High Line Hotel /15 Schulman v. Town Sports Int l /15 Soto v. NYC /14 Soto-Rodriguez v. Visiting Nurse Service of /13 Sunny View. v. Manhattan Park Properties /16 Tarantino v. Icon Interiors /16 Thompson v. Vdk Rlty /15 Trinidad v. Turner nst /13 Trinity Dev. NY v. Swa Architecture /14 Wells Fargo Bank v. Tornlind 11 mpliance /17 Aqulino v. Dolp 1133 Properties II /16 NYC v. Signore /17 Lawler-Shannon v. Madison Square Garden /17 Mobile Holiday v. Hn /17 Summers v. Lotte Hotel NY Palace /16 Trillos Guerra v. Zero Halliburton /10 Bank of America v. Kim /16 Charles Udoh v. NYS Dept Taxation Finance /17 Ua Builders Group v. Aven Elevator & Escalator 10 Part 18 Guardianship Justice Tanya R. Kennedy Room Part 19 Justice Kelly O Neill Levy Phone Room /11 F. Capital v. Capital Link Atm 9: /14 G Family Hldgs. v. Washington- West 11th St. 9: /13 High Definition Mri v. Kemper 9: /13 Owens v. Hunter Roberts nst. 9: /12 Perry v. Cambridge Security 9: /14 Pewritt v. mpass Group USA 9: /14 Saviano v. rnicello 9:30 Part 20 Matrimonial Justice Deborah Ann Kaplan Phone urtroom /12 Burnett v. Reid-Burnett /11 Gomez v. Bogoni /12 Schwartz v. Cenname /10 Behan v. Kornstein 9:30 Part 23 Justice Richard Braun Phone Room 418 s will be held on Tuesdays. mpliance s are at 9:30 and Preliminary s are at 10:30 s will be heard on Thursdays. Previously adjourned motions will be heard at 9:30 and newly calendared motions will be heard at 10:30 Preliminary / Rivington v. Tobal 10: /17 Bowery Hotel Dba The v. Peri Callimanopulos Aka 10: /17 Penjor v. Yildiz Hldg. A.S. 10: /16 Petralia v. 150 East 58th St. 10: /17 Ruiz v. 17 And 24 10: /17 Waste Mgt. of v. Austin Environmental 10:30 mpliance /11 Cabrera v. mprehensive Care Mgt. 9: /13 nstantiner v. Sovereign Apts., 9: /17 Cuffy v. Tdx nst. 9: /16 Depountis v. USA Mart, 9: /16 Greater NY Mutual v. lony 9: /16 Guidry v. Point Judith 9: /15 Hernandez Jr. v. Metro. 9: /17 Issah v. Polo Grounds Meat 9: /17 Jenkins v. San Jose L.P. 9: /17 Morgan v Housing Dev. 9: /17 Napoli v. Moretta 9: /15 Nugent v. Samson Funding 9: /17 Panarello v. Italian American Museum Real 9: /17 Prince v. Duane Reade 9: /15 Psilakis v. Citigroup, 9: /17 Royston v. Platt 9: /10 Shvachko v. Kotick 9: /11 Stern v. Starwood Hotels 9: /17 Torres v. NYCHA 9: /17 Wsp USA v. J & S Precision Balancing 9:30 Part 26 Guardianship Part Justice L. Visitacion-Lewis Phone Room 355 Part 30 Justice Sherry K. Heitler Phone Room 412 s are held at designated times. s are held on Mondays at staggered times. This is an E-Filing Part. Part 32 mplex Lit. Justice Arlene P. Bluth Phone Room /16 Tozzi v. Agculinary D/b/a /13 Buglino v. 4 World Trade Center 2: /16 German v. Ybl Chinese Bodywork /15 Lalondriz v. NYC Dept. of /13 Spallone v. Spallone /17 Dna Model Management v. J. Mendel /17 Dna Model Management v. J. Mendel / Bleeker St. Rest., v. Fernandez 2: /17 93 Bowery Hldgs. v. 89 Bowery Rlty. 2: /16 Ackmed v. Joselin Beauty Center Inc /16 Adirondack Ins. Exch. v. Hewu 2: /17 American Transit Ins. v. Perez /17 Board of Mgrs. of The v. Robert /08 Borrero v. The NY Times Bldg. 2: /17 Brown v. Public Service mm /17 Carrasquillo v. Olatoye /17 Castillo v. City Bay Plaza 2: /16 untry-wide v. Solomon /17 Davis v. Morse /17 Doe v. mplete Network Reps /16 English v. Infinite Nails Spa 2: /16 Evins v. Related Properties 2: /17 Foster v. Fed. Nat. Mortgage /17 Foster v. Fed. Nat. Mortgage /15 Gaulsh v. Diefenbach Pllc 2: /17 Griffin v. NYC 2: /17 Hunter v. NYC Bd. of Ed./dept. of Edu /17 Jensen v. NYC Dept. of Finance /17 Jovic v. NYC mm /16 Kotowska Bachul v. Agostinelli 2: /17 Leonard St. Properties v. NYS Div. of Housing /16 Lewis v. White Castle System 2: /13 Lobosco v. NY Univ. 2: /16 Lucido v. Eleven Riverside Drive 2: /12 McMahon v. NY Organ Donor Network 2: /16 Miller v. Turner nst. 2: /17 NYC Environmental v. Demirovic /16 O Sullivan v. Double Tree 2: /16 Pimentel v. Cherapunji 2: /16 Prime Rebar v. Foundations Group, /17 Pruitt v. NYS Div. of Housing And /17 Respibaby Ltd. v. Nostrum Technologies /17 Rhodes v. 300 E. 74 Owners 2: /15 Shelton v. King Kullen Grocery, 2: /16 Sobczak v. 154 East 23 2: /17 Thomas v. Brann Cynthia /16 Tratado De Libre mercio v. Buhler 2: /17 Usi Ins. Services v. Michael J. Kertzner 2: /17 Usi Ins. Services v. Michael J. Kertzner /17 Varner v. NYC Bd. of Ed. of Education /17 Vijungco v. NYC Civil Service mmissio /16 Wilson v. Dept. of Education /16 Zambrano v First Ave Owner. 2:15 Part 35 Justice Carol R. Edmead Phone urtroom 438 This is a Paperless Part. No Working pies Accepted. Status /14 Board of Education of The v. Lazrek 2: /16 Dimitrova Alekna v West 110 Portfolio /17 Jcmc West 34 Owner v. Penn Metro /17 Valdez v. NYC Police Dept. 9:30 Status /16 Barraclough v. Jarrett 9: /17 Pastourelle v. Chen Aka Lloyd Chen 9:30 Status /16 Feldman v. Industria Superstudio 2: /17 Anonymous v. Poole /17 Briscoe Joyce N. v. Torres- Springer Status / E 50 v. M At Beekman ndominium 9: /14 Balcazar v. Irving Trust /16 Bartley v. Caliente Cab Rest., 2: /16 Greene v. Hp Savoy Housing Dev. 2: /16 Jacob v. United Bldg. Maint. 10: /16 Kling v. 129 Lafayette St. 2: /16 Liberty Mutual Fire v. Arch Ins. 2: /16 M Crown Prod.ions, v. Phoenix Textile, 2: /15 Marshall v th Ave Rest 2: /15 McElroy v. Riverside Center Parcel 2 2: /15 Moore v. Buffalo Wild Wings 2: /15 Morrow v. Landmark Rlty. 2: /15 Paine v. NYC 2: /16 Pereira v. 55 Kennedy Drive Rlty. 2: /15 Riccardi v. 56th And Park (NY) 2: /16 Rivers v. Moffett 2: /16 Rodriguez v. Cps Fee 2: /11 Romano v. Boulevard Housing 2: /15 Soto v. Village Jv 500 East 11th 2: /15 Vargas v. J&B Mgt. Assoc /14 Witoff v. Fordham Univ. 11 mpliance /16 Becker v. Staples The Office 2: /16 Weiss v. Carey 2: / E 50 v. M At Beekman ndominium 9: /16 Dimitrova Alekna v West 110 Portfolio 10: /14 Gavin v. Time Warner Cable /16 Goodman v. Charles H. Greenthal /09 He v. Troon Mgt. 9: /16 M Crown Prod.ions, v. Phoenix Textile, 2: /16 Marimon v. L&L Foods of St. Marks /17 Stadnick v. Board of Mgrs. of The 10: /15 Vargas v. 207 Sherman /10 Wang v. Li 10 Mortgage Foreclosure Part Justice A. Cannataro Phone Room /17 Ardmore Investments 2010 v. Belzberg 2: /17 Bank of NY Mellon v. Brewer 2: /16 Bank of NY Mellon v. Lee 2: /17 Capital One v. Laub 2: /16 Christiana Trust v. Maheras 2: /17 Cit Bank v. Crawford 2: /17 Citibank v. Stuart 2: /17 Citimortgage, v. Kuperberg 2: /17 Jpmorgan Chase Bank v. Ghaffari 2: /17 Newport Beach Hldgs. v. Brown 2: /17 U.S. Bank v. Lumpkin 2: /16 Wells Fargo Bank v. Mary Lynch Aka Mary F. Lynch 2: /16 Wilmington Savings Fund v. Heo 2: /17 Wilmington Trust v. Mills 2:15 Part 36 Justice Doris Ling-han Phone Room 428 s are held on Thursdays. s are on Friday mornings. Part 39 mmercial Div. Justice Saliann Scarpulla Phone Room 208 This is a Paperless Part. No Working pies Accepted. Preliminary /17 Britvan v. Gilbert 2: /17 Britvan v. Gilbert 2: /17 Britvan v. Gilbert 2: /17 Drone Racing League, v. Kanes 2: /17 Harbinger Capital Partners v. Apollo Global Mgt. 2: /17 People of The State of v. Central Harlem Sobering 2: /17 Tepper v. Gilbert 2: /17 U.S. Bank Nat. v. N-Star Real Estate Cdo Ix 2:15 Status /16 Carlton Group v. Prop. Markets Group, 2: /13 Cf Notes v. Goldman 2: /14 Microbilt v. Lssi Data 2: /11 Wall St. Bath & Health v. 38 Gold St. 2:15 mpliance /16 Cyterna Hoosier Leasing v. Hoosier Energy Rural 2: /17 Highcap Group And re v. Jam Equities 2: /17 Teitelman M.D. v. Kantor 2:15 Pretrial /15 Quasar Trading v. Lopresti Law Group 2:15 E-Filed / West 25th St. v. Wong 9: /17 ndor Capital v. Cals Investors 10: /15 D Alessio v. Amani 2: /17 Drone Racing League, v. Laub /17 Finkelstein v. Reese Llp 10: /17 Harry Winston, v. Eclipse Jewelry /17 Kyowa Seni,, Ltd. v. Ana Aircraft Technics, /17 Saks & v. Migosa Enterprises, 10: /17 Vereit Operating v. Weil /17 Vereit Operating v. Weil 9: /17 Sola v. Blue Sky Equities 10 OTICE OF FORMA- TION of Alan Berman Architect P. Art. of Org. filed with SSNY on 12/ 1/17. Office location: NY unty. SSNY designated as agent of the P upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail a copy of any process to The P, 224 W 79th St., 2nd Fl., NY, NY Purpose: To practice the profession of Architecture d20-w j24 N OTICE OF QUALIFICA- TION of ADVICEPERIOD,. Authority filed with Secy. of State of NY (SSNY) on 12/12/17. Office location: Nassau unty. formed in Delaware (DE) on 11/05/13. SSNY designated as agent of upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail process to: Paracorp Incorporated, 2804 Gateway Oaks Dr. #100, Sacramento, CA Address to be maintained in DE: 2140 S Dupont Hwy., Camden, DE Arts of Org. filed with the Secy. of State, State of DE, Division of orations, PO Box 898, Dover DE Purpose: any lawful activities d20-w j24 N OTICE OF QUALIFICA- TION of LL SPORTS- WEAR GROUP, Appl. for Auth. filed with Secy. of State of NY (SSNY) on 11/ 22/17. Office location: NY unty. formed in Florida (FL) on 08/06/13. Princ. office of : 1385 Broadway, NY, NY SSNY designated as agent of upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail process to C T oration System, 111 Eighth Ave., NY, NY 10011, regd. agent upon whom and at which process may be served. FL addr. of : 170 NW Spanish River Blvd., Ste. 4, Boca Raton, FL Cert. of Form. filed with Secy. of State, Div. of s., Clifton Bldg Executive Center Circle, Tallahassee, FL Purpose: Any lawful activity d20-w j24 N OTICE OF FORMA- TION of 246 SPRING STREET CONDOMINIUM (NEW YORK) BORROWER, Arts. of Org. filed with Secy. of State of NY (SSNY) on 12/12/17. Office location: NY unty. Princ. office of : 246 Spring St., NY, NY SSNY designated as agent of upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail process to The Board of Managers of Trump SoHo Hotel ndominium NY at the princ. office of the. Purpose: Any lawful activity d20-w j24 N OTICE OF FORMA- T I O N of CDCR Arts. of Org. filed with Secy. of State of NY (SSNY) on 10/18/17. Office location: NY unty. SSNY designated as agent of upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail process to DLA Piper LLP (US), Attn: Robert Unger, Esq., 1251 Ave. of the Americas, NY, NY Purpose: Any lawful activity D20-W J24 N OTICE OF QUALIFICA- T I O N of GOODS & SERVICES, Appl. for Auth. filed with Secy. of State of NY (SSNY) on 12/ 11/17. Office location: NY unty. formed in Delaware (DE) on 05/05/14. Princ. office of : 151 W. 26th St., 3rd Fl., NY, NY SSNY designated as agent of upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail process to the at the princ. office of the. DE addr. of : 850 New Burton Rd., Ste. 201, Dover, DE Cert. of Form. filed with Secy. of State, 401 Federal St., Dover, DE Purpose: Any lawful activity D20-W J24 N OTICE OF FORMA- TION of FOUR GEORGE PRODUCTION Arts. of Org. filed with Secy. of State of NY (SSNY) on 12/07/17. Office location: NY unty. SSNY designated as agent of upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail process to oration Service, 80 State St., Albany, NY Purpose: Any lawful activity D20-W J24 N OTICE OF FORMA- TION of ECP-PF: NY (ROME), Arts. of Org. filed with Secy. of State of NY (SSNY) on 12/05/17. Office location: NY unty. Princ. office of : 35 Old Tavern Rd., Ste. 200, Orange, CT SSNY designated as agent of upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail process to ECP- PF Holdings Group,, c/ o Fred Dreibholz at the princ. office of the. Purpose: The business of providing fitness training facility services as Planet Fitness franchised franchise business, as currently conducted by the mpanies D20-W J24 N OTICE OF FORMA- TION of ECP-PF: NY (ITHACA), Arts. of Org. filed with Secy. of State of NY (SSNY) on 12/ 05/17. Office location: NY unty. Princ. office of : 35 Old Tavern Rd., Ste. 200, Orange, CT SSNY designated as agent of upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail process to ECP-PF Holdings Group,, c/o Fred Dreibholz at the princ. office of the. Purpose: The business of providing fitness training facility services as Planet Fitness franchised franchise business, as currently conducted by the mpanies D20-W J24 N OTICE OF QUALIFICA- TION of DK Authority filed with NY Dept. of State on 11/20/17. Office location: NY unty. formed in DE on 11/ 16/17. NY Sec. of State designated agent of upon whom process against it may be served and shall mail process to: c/o DK 1117, 321 Broadway, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866, principal business address. DE address of : c/o gency Global, 850 New Burton Rd., Ste. 201, Dover, DE Cert. of Form. filed with DE Sec. of State, 401 Federal St., Dover, DE Purpose: any lawful activity D20-W J24 N OTICE OF FORMA- TION of 54 Jane Street. Arts. of Org. filed with Secy. of State of NY (SSNY) on 12/1/09. Office location: NY unty. SSNY designated as agent of upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail process to: c/o Siren Management, 40 Exchange Place, 19th Fl., NY, NY Purpose: any lawful activity d20-f j24 N OOGA CREATIVE. Arts. of Org. filed with the SSNY on 01/08/18. Office: New York unty. SSNY designated as agent of the upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to the, 142 West 57th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY Purpose: Any lawful purpose j17-w f21 Own-and-Phile, Arts of Org. filed with Sec. of State of NY (SSNY) 12/5/2017. Cty: New York. SSNY desig. as agent upon whom process against may be served & shall mail process to Sharon R. Egilinsky, 250 E. 54th St., Ste. 20F, NY, NY General Purpose d20-w j24 ATH ENTERPRISES,. Arts. of Org. filed with the SSNY on 01/08/18. Office: Westchester unty. SSNY designated as agent of the upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to the, 482 Armonk Road, Mount Kisco, NY Purpose: Any lawful purpose j17-w f21 P Park South Investor, Art. of Org. filed NY DOS 1 2/11/17, NY S/S C/O The 14 Pine Dr., Great Neck, NY To engage in any lawful act or activity. Perpetual existence. Full indemnification d27-w j31 QIN FAMILY HOLDING TANGRAM HOUSE FLUSHING Articles of Org. filed NY Sec. of State (SSNY) 01/05/2018. Office in NY SSNY design. Agent of upon whom process may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to The 50 Riverside Blvd Unit 15D New York, NY Purpose: Any lawful activity J24-W F28 R3 Equity,. Appl. for Authority filed with Secy. of State of NY (SSNY) on 09 /14/17. Off. loc.: Nassau Original juris.: DE. SSNY des. as agent of upon whom process may be served. SSNY shall mail process to the, 600 Shames Drive, Westbury, NY Purpose: General j10-w f14 ichard Leone, Arts of Org. filed with Sec. of State of NY (SSNY) 12/ 14/2017. Cty: New York. SSNY desig. as agent upon whom process against may be served & shall mail process to 101 W. 12th St., Apt. 6C, NY, NY General Purpose d20-w j24 R UITE 302,. Arts. of Org. filed with the SSNY on 01/09/18. Office: Nassau unty. SSNY designated as agent of the upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to the, 226 7th Street, Suite 302, Garden City, NY Purpose: Any lawful purpose j26-f f28 S TONEGATE RE Articles of Org. filed NY Sec. of State (SSNY) 12/ 27/2017. Office in Nassau SSNY design. Agent of upon whom process may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to The PO Box 148 Atlantic Beach, NY Purpose: Any lawful activity J17-W F21 S SL Sunset Property Manager,Cert. Of Formation filed in DE 8/14/13, App.for Auth. filed NY DOS 8/20/13, NY S/S 601 W.26th St., Ste. 1275, NY, NY 10001, Att: Mark Karasick. DE Agent: Diversified orate Services 508 Main St. Wilmington, DE Authorized officer in DE is: DE Sec. of State, Townsend Bldg. Federal St. Dover, DE j10-w f14 COPUS EQUITY Articles of Org. filed NY Sec. of State (SSNY) 12/ 13/2017. Office in Nassau SSNY design. Agent of upon whom process may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to The 255 Central Ave Apt B105 Lawrence, NY Purpose: Any lawful activity J10-W F14 S The Judith Samuels Group,. Art. of Org. filed w/ SSNY 1/11/18. Office in NY SSNY designated for service of process and shall mail to: 217 East 66th St. Ste. 6D, NY, NY Purpose: Any lawful activity j17-w f21 THE LINDSAY THOMPSON COMPANY,, Arts. of Org. filed with the SSNY on 01/22/2018. Office loc: NY unty. SSNY has been designated as agent upon whom process against the may be served. SSNY shall mail process to: Clique Strategic Management, 1375 Broadway, 6th Fl, NY, NY Purpose: Any Lawful Purpose j24-w f28 yler A. Richards,. Filed 12/11/2017. Office: Nassau SSNY designated as agent for process & shall mail to: 12 Bayview Avenue, # 41, Lawrence, NY Purpose: Law j17-w f21 T Target Rock Enterprises, Art. of Org. filed with SSNY on 3/24/17. Off. loc.: Nassau SSNY designated as agent upon whom process may be served & shall mail proc.: 66 Mineola Ave., #146, Roslyn Heights, NY Purp.: any lawful purp d27-w j31 Top 546 Arts of Org filed with NY Sec of State (SSNY) on 8/23/17. Office: Westchester unty. SSNY designated as agent of upon whom process may be served. SSNY shall mail process to: 546 Warburton Ave, Hastings on Hudson, NY General Purposes d20-w j24 THE CHOSEN ONE. Arts. of Org. filed with the SSNY on 12/12/17. Office: Nassau unty. SSNY designated as agent of the upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to the, 10 Linden Avenue, Bethpage, NY Purpose: Any lawful purpose d19-tu j23 nion Square Eye Center, Arts of Org. filed with Sec. of State of NY (SSNY) 11/20/2009. Cty: New York. SSNY desig. as agent upon whom process against may be served & shall mail process to Po Box 100, NY, NY General Purpose j3-w f7 U eterans Road SPE. Arts. of Org. filed with the SSNY on 12/12/17. Office: New York unty. SSNY designated as agent of the upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to the, c/o Equator Capital Mangement, 125 Park Avenue, 25th Floor, New York, NY Purpose: Any lawful purpose d27-w j31 V ARNER STREET. Arts. of Org. filed with SSNY on 12/26/17. Off. Loc. :Nass SSNY design. as agt. upon whom process may be served. Reg. agt. upon whom and at which SSNY to mail process: US Agt., th Ave #202, General Purposes j24-w f28 W ORLD PEACE IN ONE HOUR. Arts. of Org. filed with the SSNY on 01/02/18. Office: Westchester unty. SSNY designated as agent of the upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to the, PO Box 145, Croton On Hudson, NY Purpose: Any lawful purpose j17-w f21 W WT Property Holdings, Art. of Org. filed with SSNY on 9/14/17. Off. loc.: Nassau SSNY designated as agent upon whom process may be served & shall mail proc.: 10 Verbena Ave., Floral Park, NY Purp.: any lawful purp d27-w j31 XYLOURIS WHITE,. Arts. of Org. filed with the SSNY on 01/09/18. Office: Nassau unty. SSNY designated as agent of the upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to the, c/o Jim White, 13 St. Francis Place, Brooklyn, NY Purpose: Any lawful purpose j17-w f TH AVENUE PART- NERS, Art. of Org. filed NY DOS 10/26/17,NY S/S C/O Jenel Mgmt 275 Madison Ave.,Ste. 1100, NY, NY To engage in any lawful act or activity. Perpetual existence. Full indemnification d27-w j31 SC 48 MEMBER. App. for Auth. filed with the SSNY on 12/27/17. Originally filed with Secretary of State of Delaware on 11/ 20/2015. Office: Nassau unty. SSNY designated as agent of the upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail copy of process to the, 420 Great Neck Road, Great Neck, NY Purpose: Any lawful purpose j10-w f14 ystematic Alpha Cryptocurrency Management,. Arts. of Org. filed with SSNY on 12/ 06/17. Off. Loc.: New York SSNY desig. as agt. upon whom process may be served. SSNY shall mail process to: The, 152 West 57th St 10th FL New York, NY General Purposes j3-w f7 S LIMITED LIABILITY ENTITIES LIMITED LIABILITY ENTITIES LIMITED LIABILITY ENTITIES Looking for an accomplished expert? ALM Experts has leaders in every discipline. ONE ultimate resource includes: More than 15,000 profiles of leading expert witnesses 4,000 areas of expertise covering all 50 states Access to a range of high-profile experts is just a click away. ALMExperts.com Your source for experts, consultants & litigation support services. urt Calendars New York unty urt Calendars ntinued From Page 12 WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, nylj.com

Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department D51351 M/afa

Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department D51351 M/afa Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department D51351 M/afa AD3d Argued - October 4, 2016 MARK C. DILLON, J.P. SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX JOSEPH J. MALTESE BETSY BARROS,

More information

Analisa Salon Ltd. v Elide Prop. LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 34125(U) July 22, 2011 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 7582/05 Judge: Orazio R.

Analisa Salon Ltd. v Elide Prop. LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 34125(U) July 22, 2011 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 7582/05 Judge: Orazio R. Analisa Salon Ltd. v Elide Prop. LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 34125(U) July 22, 2011 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 7582/05 Judge: Orazio R. Bellantoni Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS REL: 09/18/2015 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate

More information

Canon Fin. Servs., Inc. v Meyers Assoc., LP 2014 NY Slip Op 32519(U) September 26, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013

Canon Fin. Servs., Inc. v Meyers Assoc., LP 2014 NY Slip Op 32519(U) September 26, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Canon Fin. Servs., Inc. v Meyers Assoc., LP 2014 NY Slip Op 32519(U) September 26, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 650613/2013 Judge: Debra A. James Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

Case 2:17-cv MSG Document 7 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:17-cv MSG Document 7 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 2:17-cv-01903-MSG Document 7 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MARCIA WOODS, et al. : : CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff, : : v. : : NO.

More information

Aurora Assoc., LLC v Hennen 2017 NY Slip Op 30032(U) January 6, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Nancy M.

Aurora Assoc., LLC v Hennen 2017 NY Slip Op 30032(U) January 6, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Nancy M. Aurora Assoc., LLC v Hennen 2017 NY Slip Op 30032(U) January 6, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 154644/2015 Judge: Nancy M. Bannon Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

Bell v New York City Hous. Auth NY Slip Op 31933(U) October 15, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /13 Judge: Cynthia S.

Bell v New York City Hous. Auth NY Slip Op 31933(U) October 15, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /13 Judge: Cynthia S. Bell v New York City Hous. Auth. 2015 NY Slip Op 31933(U) October 15, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 155513/13 Judge: Cynthia S. Kern Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Kahn, JJ Index / Sarah Weinberg, Plaintiff-Appellant,

Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Kahn, JJ Index / Sarah Weinberg, Plaintiff-Appellant, Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Kahn, JJ. 1256- Index 652273/13 1257 Sarah Weinberg, Plaintiff-Appellant, against Leslie Sultan, et al., Defendants-Respondents. Amed Marzano & Sediva,

More information

Matter of Duraku v Tishman Speyer Props., LP 2014 NY Slip Op 31450(U) June 3, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /13 Judge:

Matter of Duraku v Tishman Speyer Props., LP 2014 NY Slip Op 31450(U) June 3, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /13 Judge: Matter of Duraku v Tishman Speyer Props., LP 2014 NY Slip Op 31450(U) June 3, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653545/13 Judge: Manuel J. Mendez Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

Supreme Court of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida Supreme Court of Florida PER CURIAM. No. SC11-697 ROMAN PINO, Petitioner, vs. THE BANK OF NEW YORK, etc., et al., Respondents. [December 8, 2011] The issue we address is whether Florida Rule of Appellate

More information

Case 8:13-cv RWT Document 37 Filed 03/13/14 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Case 8:13-cv RWT Document 37 Filed 03/13/14 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Case 8:13-cv-03056-RWT Document 37 Filed 03/13/14 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND BRENDA LEONARD-RUFUS EL, * RAHN EDWARD RUFUS EL * * Plaintiffs, * * v. * Civil

More information

Case 0:16-cv WPD Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2017 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 0:16-cv WPD Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2017 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case 0:16-cv-61856-WPD Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2017 Page 1 of 11 JENNIFER SANDOVAL, vs. Plaintiff, RONALD R. WOLFE & ASSOCIATES, P.L., SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC., and NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE,

More information

Nexbank, SSB v Soffer 2015 NY Slip Op 30167(U) February 3, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Shirley Werner

Nexbank, SSB v Soffer 2015 NY Slip Op 30167(U) February 3, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Shirley Werner Nexbank, SSB v Soffer 2015 NY Slip Op 30167(U) February 3, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 652072/2013 Judge: Shirley Werner Kornreich Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/12/2013 INDEX NO /2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 65 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/12/2013

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/12/2013 INDEX NO /2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 65 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/12/2013 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/12/2013 INDEX NO. 653787/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 65 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/12/2013 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK HOME EQUITY MORTGAGE TRUST SERIES

More information

Case4:09-cv SBA Document42 Document48 Filed12/17/09 Filed02/01/10 Page1 of 7

Case4:09-cv SBA Document42 Document48 Filed12/17/09 Filed02/01/10 Page1 of 7 Case:0-cv-00-SBA Document Document Filed//0 Filed0/0/0 Page of 0 0 BAY AREA LEGAL AID LISA GREIF, State Bar No. NAOMI YOUNG, State Bar No. 00 ROBERT P. CAPISTRANO, State Bar No. 0 Telegraph Avenue Oakland,

More information

SABINE CONSOLIDATED, INC., APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, AP- PELLEE; JOSEPH TANTILLO, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, AP- PELLEE

SABINE CONSOLIDATED, INC., APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, AP- PELLEE; JOSEPH TANTILLO, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, AP- PELLEE SABINE CONSOLIDATED, INC., APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, AP- PELLEE; JOSEPH TANTILLO, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, AP- PELLEE Nos. 3-87-051-CR, 3-87-055-CR COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, Third District,

More information

LIMITATION OF ACTIONS ACT

LIMITATION OF ACTIONS ACT LAWS OF KENYA LIMITATION OF ACTIONS ACT CHAPTER 22 Revised Edition 2012 [2010] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org [Rev. 2012]

More information

THE MARYMOUNT MANHATTAN COLLEGE RESIDENCE WITNESSETH:

THE MARYMOUNT MANHATTAN COLLEGE RESIDENCE WITNESSETH: THE MARYMOUNT MANHATTAN COLLEGE RESIDENCE This LICENSE AGREEMENT (this License Agreement ) made as of this, by and between EDUCATIONAL HOUSING SERVICES, INC., a New York not-for-profit corporation, having

More information

Filed 8/ 25/ 16 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

Filed 8/ 25/ 16 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS Filed 8/ 25/ 16 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered

More information

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 LISA A. AND KEVIN BARRON Appellants IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ALLIED PROPERTIES, INC. AND COLONNADE, LLC, AND MAXWELL TRUCKING

More information

Frydman v Francese 2017 NY Slip Op 31069(U) May 15, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Cynthia S.

Frydman v Francese 2017 NY Slip Op 31069(U) May 15, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Cynthia S. Frydman v Francese 2017 NY Slip Op 31069(U) May 15, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 155477/2015 Judge: Cynthia S. Kern Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),

More information

Manda Intl. Corp. v Yager 2015 NY Slip Op 31920(U) October 14, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /13 Judge: Saliann Scarpulla

Manda Intl. Corp. v Yager 2015 NY Slip Op 31920(U) October 14, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /13 Judge: Saliann Scarpulla Manda Intl. Corp. v Yager 2015 NY Slip Op 31920(U) October 14, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653012/13 Judge: Saliann Scarpulla Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY

More information

DeJesus v West Side Marquis LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 32364(U) November 13, 2017 Supreme Court, New York Docket Number: /2017 Judge: Erika M.

DeJesus v West Side Marquis LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 32364(U) November 13, 2017 Supreme Court, New York Docket Number: /2017 Judge: Erika M. DeJesus v West Side Marquis LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 32364(U) November 13, 2017 Supreme Court, New York Docket Number: 151122/2017 Judge: Erika M. Edwards Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

Hernandez v Marquez 2012 NY Slip Op 31112(U) April 20, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Joan A. Madden Republished

Hernandez v Marquez 2012 NY Slip Op 31112(U) April 20, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Joan A. Madden Republished Hernandez v Marquez 2012 NY Slip Op 31112(U) April 20, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 103531/11 Judge: Joan A. Madden Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts

More information

Case 1:11-cv WHP Document 100 Filed 09/27/11 Page 1 of 13

Case 1:11-cv WHP Document 100 Filed 09/27/11 Page 1 of 13 Case 1:11-cv-05988-WHP Document 100 Filed 09/27/11 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In the matter of the application of THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON (as Trustee under

More information

WHEN IS A FORECLOSURE SALE FINAL IN NORTH CAROLINA?

WHEN IS A FORECLOSURE SALE FINAL IN NORTH CAROLINA? WHEN IS A FORECLOSURE SALE FINAL IN NORTH CAROLINA? Can a borrower invoke Rule 60(b) to unwind a completed foreclosure sale after the property changes hands? The surprising answer is maybe, under the right

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Case: 14-20188 Document: 00512877989 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/19/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED December 19, 2014 LARRY

More information

MAGISTRATE COURT PRACTICE. By Dan Fowler RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR MAGISTRATE COURTS

MAGISTRATE COURT PRACTICE. By Dan Fowler RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR MAGISTRATE COURTS MAGISTRATE COURT PRACTICE By Dan Fowler RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR MAGISTRATE COURTS Pursuant to the authority granted it by WV Code 50-1-16, the Supreme Court of Appeals has adopted Rules of Civil Procedure

More information

Chiffert v Kwiat 2010 NY Slip Op 33821(U) June 4, 2010 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2010 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases posted with

Chiffert v Kwiat 2010 NY Slip Op 33821(U) June 4, 2010 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2010 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases posted with Chiffert v Kwiat 2010 NY Slip Op 33821(U) June 4, 2010 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 1000785/2010 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),

More information

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS REL: 03/16/2012 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate

More information

Court of Appeals. Slip Opinion

Court of Appeals. Slip Opinion An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)

More information

Harding v Cowing 2015 NY Slip Op 30701(U) April 30, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /14 Judge: Donna M. Mills Cases posted

Harding v Cowing 2015 NY Slip Op 30701(U) April 30, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /14 Judge: Donna M. Mills Cases posted Harding v Cowing 2015 NY Slip Op 30701(U) April 30, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 157506/14 Judge: Donna M. Mills Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),

More information

Gatto v Smith 2012 NY Slip Op 33105(U) December 20, 2012 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 2572/11 Judge: Howard G. Lane Republished from New York

Gatto v Smith 2012 NY Slip Op 33105(U) December 20, 2012 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 2572/11 Judge: Howard G. Lane Republished from New York Gatto v Smith 2012 NY Slip Op 33105(U) December 20, 2012 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 2572/11 Judge: Howard G. Lane Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service. Search

More information

GUYANA TRADE UNIONS ACT. Arrangement of sections

GUYANA TRADE UNIONS ACT. Arrangement of sections GUYANA TRADE UNIONS ACT Arrangement of sections 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. 3. Trade unions. 4. Exemptions. 5. When objects of union not unlawful. 6. When trade union contracts not enforceable.

More information

REMOVAL OF COURT OFFICIALS

REMOVAL OF COURT OFFICIALS REMOVAL OF COURT OFFICIALS Michael Crowell UNC School of Government January 2015 Constitutional provisions Article IV, Section 17 of the North Carolina Constitution addresses the removal of justices, judges,

More information

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: December 2, 2010 508890 MARIA J. HARRISON et al., Appellants, v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WESTVIEW PARTNERS,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND : EXCHANGE COMMISSION, : : Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11-2054 (RC) : v. : Re Documents No.: 32, 80 : GARFIELD

More information

Belkin Burden Wenig & Goldman, LLP, New York (Jeffrey L. Goldman of counsel), for respondents-appellants.

Belkin Burden Wenig & Goldman, LLP, New York (Jeffrey L. Goldman of counsel), for respondents-appellants. Matter of People of the State of N.Y. by Eric T. Schneiderman v Trump Entrepreneur Initiative LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 01430 Decided on March 1, 2016 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York

More information

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 17a0609n.06. No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 17a0609n.06. No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 17a0609n.06 No. 17-5194 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT IN RE: GREGORY LANE COUCH; ANGELA LEE COUCH Debtors. GREGORY COUCH v. Appellant,

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS GLENNA BRYAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR PUBLICATION April 10, 2014 9:05 a.m. v No. 313279 Oakland Circuit Court JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, LC No. 2012-124595-CH Defendant-Appellee.

More information

Rosenberg v Hedlund 2016 NY Slip Op 30191(U) February 3, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Eileen A.

Rosenberg v Hedlund 2016 NY Slip Op 30191(U) February 3, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Eileen A. Rosenberg v Hedlund 2016 NY Slip Op 30191(U) February 3, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 151115/2015 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

More information

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed November 22, 2017. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D17-1517 Lower Tribunal No. 16-31938 Asset Recovery

More information

Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States No. 16-784 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States MERIT MANAGEMENT GROUP, LP, v. Petitioner, FTI CONSULTING, INC., Respondent. On Writ

More information

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: March 5, 2015 105120 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ROBERT J.

More information

Hagensen v Ferro, Kuba, Mangano, Sklyar, Gacavino & Lake, P.C NY Slip Op 33548(U) January 3, 2012 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number:

Hagensen v Ferro, Kuba, Mangano, Sklyar, Gacavino & Lake, P.C NY Slip Op 33548(U) January 3, 2012 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: Hagensen v Ferro, Kuba, Mangano, Sklyar, Gacavino & Lake, P.C. 2012 NY Slip Op 33548(U) January 3, 2012 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 111482/2007 Judge: Carol R. Edmead Cases posted with a "30000"

More information

Love v BMW of N. Am., LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 30528(U) February 21, 2017 Supreme Court, Richmond County Docket Number: /16 Judge: Kim Dollard Cases

Love v BMW of N. Am., LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 30528(U) February 21, 2017 Supreme Court, Richmond County Docket Number: /16 Judge: Kim Dollard Cases Love v BMW of N. Am., LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 30528(U) February 21, 2017 Supreme Court, Richmond County Docket Number: 150653/16 Judge: Kim Dollard Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

More information

Simpson v Alter 2011 NY Slip Op 31765(U) June 21, 2011 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 11095/09 Judge: Thomas P. Phelan Republished from

Simpson v Alter 2011 NY Slip Op 31765(U) June 21, 2011 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 11095/09 Judge: Thomas P. Phelan Republished from Simpson v Alter 2011 NY Slip Op 31765(U) June 21, 2011 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 11095/09 Judge: Thomas P. Phelan Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service.

More information

Case 1:15-cv SAS Document 14 Filed 12/03/15 Page 1 of 14

Case 1:15-cv SAS Document 14 Filed 12/03/15 Page 1 of 14 Case 1:15-cv-05473-SAS Document 14 Filed 12/03/15 Page 1 of 14 Case 1:15-cv-05473-SAS Document 14 Filed 12/03/15 Page 2 of 14 Owner LLC ( Fisher-Park ). For the reasons set forth below, the Bankruptcy

More information

Toribino v NR Prop. 2 LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 32429(U) October 12, 2017 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: /08 Judge: Wilma Guzman Cases

Toribino v NR Prop. 2 LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 32429(U) October 12, 2017 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: /08 Judge: Wilma Guzman Cases Toribino v NR Prop. 2 LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 32429(U) October 12, 2017 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: 307368/08 Judge: Wilma Guzman Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op

More information

DAVID M. ELLIOTT and ELLIOTT AIR, INC., Plaintiffs, v. LISA L. ELLIOTT, DIANE K. NICHOLS, KAREN POWERS, and DENNIS L. MORAN, Defendants.

DAVID M. ELLIOTT and ELLIOTT AIR, INC., Plaintiffs, v. LISA L. ELLIOTT, DIANE K. NICHOLS, KAREN POWERS, and DENNIS L. MORAN, Defendants. DAVID M. ELLIOTT and ELLIOTT AIR, INC., Plaintiffs, v. LISA L. ELLIOTT, DIANE K. NICHOLS, KAREN POWERS, and DENNIS L. MORAN, Defendants. NO. COA08-1493 (Filed 6 October 2009) 1. Civil Procedure Rule 60

More information

Police Dep t v. Nightstar OATH Index No. 3190/09, mem. dec. (June 19, 2009)

Police Dep t v. Nightstar OATH Index No. 3190/09, mem. dec. (June 19, 2009) Police Dep t v. Nightstar OATH Index No. 3190/09, mem. dec. (June 19, 2009) In vehicle forfeiture proceeding, ALJ found that petitioner proved that owner was not innocent and that the other Krimstock elements

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 10, 2005 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 10, 2005 Session IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 10, 2005 Session PATSY C. CATE v. JAMES DANIEL THOMAS A Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court for Madison County No. 58062 The Honorable Steven Stafford,

More information

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA REL:05/15/2009 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/04/ :40 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/04/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/04/ :40 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/04/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/04/2016 02:40 PM INDEX NO. 159321/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/04/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------------------X

More information

Rubin v KDG Pound Ridge 2014 NY Slip Op 32872(U) May 5, 2014 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 50957/2011 Judge: James W. Hubert Cases posted

Rubin v KDG Pound Ridge 2014 NY Slip Op 32872(U) May 5, 2014 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 50957/2011 Judge: James W. Hubert Cases posted Rubin v KDG Pound Ridge 2014 NY Slip Op 32872(U) May 5, 2014 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 50957/2011 Judge: James W. Hubert Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),

More information

BANKRUPTCY ACT (CHAPTER 20)

BANKRUPTCY ACT (CHAPTER 20) BANKRUPTCY ACT (CHAPTER 20) Act 15 of 1995 1996REVISED EDITION Cap. 20 2000 REVISEDEDITION Cap. 20 37 of 1999 42 of 1999 S 380/97 S 126/99 S 301/99 37 of 2001 38 of 2002 An Act relating to the law of bankruptcy

More information

Paiba v FJC Sec., Inc NY Slip Op 30383(U) February 24, 2015 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Mary Ann Brigantti

Paiba v FJC Sec., Inc NY Slip Op 30383(U) February 24, 2015 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Mary Ann Brigantti Paiba v FJC Sec., Inc. 2015 NY Slip Op 30383(U) February 24, 2015 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: 306872/2012 Judge: Mary Ann Brigantti Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS NICK CIRENESE, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED May 16, 2017 v No. 331208 Oakland Circuit Court TORSION CONTROL PRODUCTS, INC., TIM LC No. 2015-146123-CD THANE, and DAN

More information

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA. EDDIE CROSS OPINION BY v. Record No JUDGE WILLIAM G. PETTY APRIL 3, 2007 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA. EDDIE CROSS OPINION BY v. Record No JUDGE WILLIAM G. PETTY APRIL 3, 2007 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Frank, Petty and Senior Judge Willis Argued at Chesapeake, Virginia EDDIE CROSS OPINION BY v. Record No. 2781-04-1 JUDGE WILLIAM G. PETTY APRIL 3, 2007 COMMONWEALTH

More information

S17G1097. BROWN et al. v. RAC ACCEPTANCE EAST, LLC. After RAC Acceptance East, LLC swore out a warrant for Mira Brown s

S17G1097. BROWN et al. v. RAC ACCEPTANCE EAST, LLC. After RAC Acceptance East, LLC swore out a warrant for Mira Brown s In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: January 29, 2018 S17G1097. BROWN et al. v. RAC ACCEPTANCE EAST, LLC. NAHMIAS, Justice. After RAC Acceptance East, LLC swore out a warrant for Mira Brown s arrest

More information

Gallipoli v Russo 2010 NY Slip Op 33650(U) November 16, 2010 Supreme Court, Suffolk County Docket Number: Judge: Joseph C.

Gallipoli v Russo 2010 NY Slip Op 33650(U) November 16, 2010 Supreme Court, Suffolk County Docket Number: Judge: Joseph C. Gallipoli v Russo 2010 NY Slip Op 33650(U) November 16, 2010 Supreme Court, Suffolk County Docket Number: 08-39607 Judge: Joseph C. Pastoressa Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts

More information

169 Bowery, LLC v Bowery Dev. Group, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 33377(U) January 29, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /10 Judge: Joan A.

169 Bowery, LLC v Bowery Dev. Group, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 33377(U) January 29, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /10 Judge: Joan A. 169 Bowery, LLC v Bowery Dev. Group, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 33377(U) January 29, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 651102/10 Judge: Joan A. Madden Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

O'Farrel v City of New York 2016 NY Slip Op 30242(U) January 12, 2016 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: /10 Judge: Eddie J.

O'Farrel v City of New York 2016 NY Slip Op 30242(U) January 12, 2016 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: /10 Judge: Eddie J. O'Farrel v City of New York 2016 NY Slip Op 30242(U) January 12, 2016 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: 302915/10 Judge: Eddie J. McShan Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. Nos ; Non-Argument Calendar

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. Nos ; Non-Argument Calendar Case: 14-10826 Date Filed: 09/11/2014 Page: 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT Nos. 14-10826; 14-11149 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 8:13-cv-02197-JDW, Bkcy

More information

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA REL:06/05/2015 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate

More information

Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act

Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act Tex. Hum. Res. Code 36.006 Page 1 36.001. [Expires September 1, 2015] Definitions Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act (Tex. Hum. Res. Code 36.001 to 117) i In this chapter: (1) "Claim" means a written

More information

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York (Steven C. Wu of counsel), for respondent.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York (Steven C. Wu of counsel), for respondent. People v Credit Suisse Sec. (USA) LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 08339 Decided on December 13, 2016 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law

More information

of the Magistrate Judge within 14 days after being served with a copy of the Report and ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

of the Magistrate Judge within 14 days after being served with a copy of the Report and ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Case 1:13-cv-00052-LY Document 32 Filed 07/15/13 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 2013 JUL 15 P11 14: [ AUSTIN DIVISION JERRENE L'AMOREAUX AND CLARKE F.

More information

Case 2:08-cv JLL-CCC Document 46 Filed 10/23/2009 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 2:08-cv JLL-CCC Document 46 Filed 10/23/2009 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 2:08-cv-04143-JLL-CCC Document 46 Filed 10/23/2009 Page 1 of 13 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY THOMASON AUTO GROUP, LLC, v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: 08-4143

More information

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio [Cite as Ballard v. State, 2012-Ohio-3086.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 97882 RASHAD BALLARD PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT vs. STATE OF OHIO

More information

Case 2:17-cv GJP Document 9 Filed 12/11/17 Page 1 of 11

Case 2:17-cv GJP Document 9 Filed 12/11/17 Page 1 of 11 Case 2:17-cv-02582-GJP Document 9 Filed 12/11/17 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DANIEL S. PENNACHIETTI, v. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-02582

More information

Case 2:16-cv AJS Document 125 Filed 01/27/17 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:16-cv AJS Document 125 Filed 01/27/17 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 2:16-cv-01375-AJS Document 125 Filed 01/27/17 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA LISA GATHERS, et al., 16cv1375 v. Plaintiffs, LEAD CASE NEW YORK

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION 2:17-cv-13241-BAF-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 10/03/17 Pg 1 of 20 Pg ID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION SHARON STEIN, as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN

More information

COUNTY OF NASSAU. PRESENT: HON. IRA B. WARSHAWSKY, Justice. TRIAL/IAS PART 20. Plaintiff, Defendants.

COUNTY OF NASSAU. PRESENT: HON. IRA B. WARSHAWSKY, Justice. TRIAL/IAS PART 20. Plaintiff, Defendants. SHORT FORM ORDER SUPREME COURT - STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU / t PRESENT: HON. IRA B. WARSHAWSKY, Justice. TRIAL/IAS PART 20 ROBERT F. VAN DER WAAG, - against - Plaintiff, INDEX NO.: 013077/2002

More information

433 Main Street Realty, LLC et al v. Darwin National Assurance Company Doc. 33

433 Main Street Realty, LLC et al v. Darwin National Assurance Company Doc. 33 433 Main Street Realty, LLC et al v. Darwin National Assurance Company Doc. 33 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------)(

More information

Alken Industries, Inc. v Toxey Leonard & Assoc., Inc NY Slip Op 31864(U) August 2, 2013 Sup Ct, Suffolk County Docket Number: Judge:

Alken Industries, Inc. v Toxey Leonard & Assoc., Inc NY Slip Op 31864(U) August 2, 2013 Sup Ct, Suffolk County Docket Number: Judge: Alken Industries, Inc. v Toxey Leonard & Assoc., Inc. 2013 NY Slip Op 31864(U) August 2, 2013 Sup Ct, Suffolk County Docket Number: 17304-11 Judge: Elizabeth H. Emerson Republished from New York State

More information

Case 3:07-cv Document 38 Filed 12/28/2007 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Case 3:07-cv Document 38 Filed 12/28/2007 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION Case 3:07-cv-00615 Document 38 Filed 12/28/2007 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION DONALD KRAUSE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 3:07-CV-0615-L v.

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS JOSEPH MOORE and CINDY MOORE, Plaintiffs-Appellants, UNPUBLISHED November 27, 2001 V No. 221599 Wayne Circuit Court DETROIT NEWSPAPER AGENCY, LC No. 98-822599-NI Defendant-Appellee.

More information

Sparta Commercial Servs. Inc. v Vis Vires Group Inc 2016 NY Slip Op 30199(U) February 2, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Sparta Commercial Servs. Inc. v Vis Vires Group Inc 2016 NY Slip Op 30199(U) February 2, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Sparta Commercial Servs. Inc. v Vis Vires Group Inc 2016 NY Slip Op 30199(U) February 2, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653870/2015 Judge: Saliann Scarpulla Cases posted with a "30000"

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT EMINENCE INVESTORS, L.L.L.P., an Arkansas Limited Liability Limited Partnership, Individually, and on behalf of all others similarly

More information

Spektor v Caiati 2017 NY Slip Op 31076(U) May 16, 2017 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: /13 Judge: Debra Silber Cases posted with a

Spektor v Caiati 2017 NY Slip Op 31076(U) May 16, 2017 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: /13 Judge: Debra Silber Cases posted with a Spektor v Caiati 2017 NY Slip Op 31076(U) May 16, 2017 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 508007/13 Judge: Debra Silber Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are

More information

IDT Corp. v Tyco Group, S.A.R.L NY Slip Op 31981(U) October 17, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Saliann

IDT Corp. v Tyco Group, S.A.R.L NY Slip Op 31981(U) October 17, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Saliann IDT Corp. v Tyco Group, S.A.R.L. 2016 NY Slip Op 31981(U) October 17, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 652236/15 Judge: Saliann Scarpulla Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,

More information

Eric Brenner, for appellant. Jean-Marie L. Atamian, for respondents. Plaintiff Paul Davis was an owner of ordinary shares in

Eric Brenner, for appellant. Jean-Marie L. Atamian, for respondents. Plaintiff Paul Davis was an owner of ordinary shares in This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. ----------------------------------------------------------------- No. 111 Paul Davis, Appellant, v. Scottish

More information

RULES AND STATUTES ON HABEAS CORPUS with Amendments and Additions in the ANTITERRORISM AND EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT OF 1996

RULES AND STATUTES ON HABEAS CORPUS with Amendments and Additions in the ANTITERRORISM AND EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT OF 1996 RULES AND STATUTES ON HABEAS CORPUS with Amendments and Additions in the ANTITERRORISM AND EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT OF 1996 CRIMINAL JUSTICE LEGAL FOUNDATION INTRODUCTION On April 24, 1996, Senate Bill

More information

MARK SILVER v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION (AC 39238)

MARK SILVER v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION (AC 39238) *********************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV MODIFY and AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed April 6, 2017. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-00741-CV DENNIS TOPLETZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS HEIR OF HAROLD TOPLETZ D/B/A TOPLETZ

More information

THE LAW OF LIMITATION ACT, 1971 PART I. Title PART II

THE LAW OF LIMITATION ACT, 1971 PART I. Title PART II THE LAW OF LIMITATION ACT, TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. PART I PRELIMINARY Title PART II LIMITATION OF ACTIONS 3. Dismissal of proceedings instituted after period of limitation.

More information

Rosenberg v Hedlund 2016 NY Slip Op 30201(U) February 4, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Eileen A.

Rosenberg v Hedlund 2016 NY Slip Op 30201(U) February 4, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Eileen A. Rosenberg v Hedlund 2016 NY Slip Op 30201(U) February 4, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 151115/2015 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

More information

v No Clinton Circuit Court DENNIS J. DUCHENE, II, ANN DUCHENE,

v No Clinton Circuit Court DENNIS J. DUCHENE, II, ANN DUCHENE, S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S JOHN THOMAS MILLER and BG&M, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants, UNPUBLISHED December 21, 2017 v No. 334731 Clinton Circuit Court DENNIS J. DUCHENE, II,

More information

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit G. DAVID JANG, M.D., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION AND SCIMED LIFE SYSTEMS, INC., Defendants-Petitioners. 2014-134 On Petition

More information

Civil Procedure Basics. N.C. Rules of Civil Procedure 7/6/2010

Civil Procedure Basics. N.C. Rules of Civil Procedure 7/6/2010 Civil Procedure Basics Ann M. Anderson N.C. Association of District Court Judges 2010 Summer Conference June 23, 2010 N.C. Rules of Civil Procedure 1A-1, Rules 1 to 83 Pretrial Injunctive Relief 65 Service

More information

SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA En Banc

SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA En Banc SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA En Banc JOHN F. HOGAN, ) Arizona Supreme Court ) No. CV-11-0115-PR Plaintiff/Appellant, ) ) Court of Appeals v. ) Division One ) No. 1 CA-CV-10-0385 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, N.A.;

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No / Filed June 27, Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, James M.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No / Filed June 27, Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, James M. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 7-183 / 05-2023 Filed June 27, 2007 ALEXANDER TECHNOLOGIES EUROPE, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MACDONALD LETTER SERVICE, INC., Substituted Party for Amazing Products

More information

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 15-3983 Melikian Enterprises, LLLP, Creditor lllllllllllllllllllllappellant v. Steven D. McCormick; Karen A. McCormick, Debtors lllllllllllllllllllllappellees

More information

Platinum Rapid Funding Group Ltd. v VIP Limousine Servs., Inc NY Slip Op 31591(U) June 8, 2016 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number:

Platinum Rapid Funding Group Ltd. v VIP Limousine Servs., Inc NY Slip Op 31591(U) June 8, 2016 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: Platinum Rapid Funding Group Ltd. v VIP Limousine Servs., Inc. 2016 NY Slip Op 31591(U) June 8, 2016 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 604163-15 Judge: Jerome C. Murphy Cases posted with a "30000"

More information

Case3:13-cv SI Document39 Filed11/18/13 Page1 of 8

Case3:13-cv SI Document39 Filed11/18/13 Page1 of 8 Case:-cv-0-SI Document Filed// Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 0 STEVEN POLNICKY, v. Plaintiff, LIBERTY LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF BOSTON; WELLS FARGO

More information

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED YARELYS RAMOS AND JOHN PRATER, Appellants,

More information

SERVICEMEMBERS CIVIL RELIEF ACT (50 U.S.C. APP ) Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, Luke AFB, AZ, (623)

SERVICEMEMBERS CIVIL RELIEF ACT (50 U.S.C. APP ) Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, Luke AFB, AZ, (623) SERVICEMEMBERS CIVIL RELIEF ACT (50 U.S.C. APP. 501 597) Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, Luke AFB, AZ, (623) 856-6901 Active duty military members, Reservists on Title 10 status, and National Guard

More information

Lugo v City of New York 2013 NY Slip Op 30267(U) January 29, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2010 Judge: Kathryn E.

Lugo v City of New York 2013 NY Slip Op 30267(U) January 29, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2010 Judge: Kathryn E. Lugo v City of New York 2013 NY Slip Op 30267(U) January 29, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 105267/2010 Judge: Kathryn E. Freed Republished from New York State Unified Court System's

More information

M & R Ginsburg, L.L.C. v Segel, Goldman, Mazzotta & Siegel, P.C NY Slip Op 33866(U) November 15, 2012 Supreme Court, Saratoga County Docket

M & R Ginsburg, L.L.C. v Segel, Goldman, Mazzotta & Siegel, P.C NY Slip Op 33866(U) November 15, 2012 Supreme Court, Saratoga County Docket M & R Ginsburg, L.L.C. v Segel, Goldman, Mazzotta & Siegel, P.C. 2012 NY Slip Op 33866(U) November 15, 2012 Supreme Court, Saratoga County Docket Number: 20094258 Judge: Jr., Thomas D. Nolan Cases posted

More information