Return to New Filings Page


For January 13, 2012 through January 19, 2012, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

CANGRO v MARANGOS (90 AD3d 470):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 12/8/11; affirmance; sua sponte examination of whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved or any other basis exists to support an appeal as of right; PLEADING - SUFFICIENCY OF PLEADING - DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION; Supreme Court, New York County denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross motion to dismiss the complaint; App. Div. affirmed.

DAMIAN G. and MADISON G., MATTER OF (88 AD3d 1268):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 10/7/11; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 1/12/12; Rule 500.11 review pending; PARENT AND CHILD - ABUSED OR NEGLECTED CHILD - WHETHER RECORD CONTAINS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OF NEGLECT TO SUPPORT THE ADJUDICATION; Family Court, Oneida County adjudicated the subject children to be neglected; App. Div. affirmed.

OVERSTOCK.COM, INC. v NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION AND FINANCE (81 AD3d 183):
12/13/11 stipulation of discontinuance, bringing up for review 1st Dept. App. Div. order of 11/4/10; modification; sua sponte examination whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - VALIDITY OF STATUTE - CHALLENGE TO TAX LAW § 1101(b)(8)(vi); DECLARATORY JUDGMENT; Supreme Court, New York County dismissed the complaint; App. Div. modified to declare that the statute is constitutional on its face and does not violate the Equal Protection Clause either on its face or as applied, and to reinstate the complaint for further proceedings with regard to the claims that, as applied, the statute violates the Commerce and Due Process Clauses; thereafter, plaintiff discontinued its remaining claims.

SUNRISE CHECK CASHING AND PAYROLL SERVICES, INC. v TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD (91 AD3d 126):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 11/29/11; reversal; MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS - ZONING - REGULATION PROHIBITING CHECK-CASHING ESTABLISHMENTS WITHIN TOWN UNLESS THEY ARE LOCATED IN INDUSTRIAL AND LIGHT MANUFACTURING DISTRICTS - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN HOLDING THAT, UNDER THE DOCTRINE OF CONFLICT PREEMPTION, THE REGULATION IS PREEMPTED BY BANKING LAW § 369 - SEPARATION OF POWERS - HOME RULE REQUIREMENTS; Supreme Court, Nassau County denied plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the complaint and granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment, in effect declaring that section 302(K) of article XXXI of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Hempstead is valid; App. Div. reversed; granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the complaint; denied defendant's cross motion for summary judgment, in effect, declaring valid section 302(K) of article XXXI of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Hempstead; and remitted the matter to Supreme Court, Nassau County, for the entry of a judgment declaring that section 302(K) of article XXXI of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Hempstead is void and of no effect.

WALKER (SAMUEL), PEOPLE v (88 AD3d 1287):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 10/7/11; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Graffeo, J., 1/9/12; CRIMES - SUPPRESSION HEARING - VEHICLE STOPPED FOR TRAFFIC INFRACTION THEN IMPOUNDED DUE TO SUSPENSION OF DRIVER'S LICENSE, DESPITE ANOTHER LICENSED DRIVER IN CAR - INVENTORY SEARCH AFTER IMPOUNDMENT OF VEHICLE REVEALED LOADED HANDGUN - WHETHER IMPOUNDMENT POLICY PROHIBITING ANY LICENSED DRIVER OTHER THAN REGISTERED OWNER FROM TAKING POSSESSION OF STOPPED VEHICLE VIOLATES DRIVER'S RIGHTS; Supreme Court, Erie County convicted defendant, upon his guilty plea, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree; App. Div. affirmed and remitted to Supreme Court for proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50(5).

For January 20, 2012 through January 26, 2012, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

EAST MIDTOWN PLAZA HOUSING COMPANY, INC. v CUOMO (85 AD3d 485):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 6/14/11; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 1/10/12; CONDOMINIUMS AND COOPERATIVES - COOPERATIVE APARTMENTS - PROCEEDING TO COMPEL APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF AMENDMENT TO COOPERATIVE OFFERING PLAN - WHETHER ARTICLE 23-A OF THE GENERAL BUSINESS LAW APPLIES TO PETITIONER'S PLAN TO WITHDRAW FROM THE MITCHELL-LAMA PROGRAM AND RECONSTITUTE AS A PRIVATE COOPERATIVE - UNTRUE OR MISLEADING STATEMENT IN AMENDMENT TO OFFERING PLAN AS BASIS FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REJECTION OF AMENDMENT; RATIONALITY OF METHOD FOR COUNTING DISSOLUTION VOTES - ONE VOTE PER APARTMENT RATHER THAN ONE VOTE PER SHARE - AGENCY RULE REQUIRING "APPROVAL OF TWO-THIRDS OF OUTSTANDING SHARES" - BUSINESS CORPORATION LAW § 1001; Supreme Court, New York County denied East Midtown Plaza Company, Inc.'s petition to compel, among other things, the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development to approve its plan to privatize a Mitchell-Lama development and to compel the Attorney General of the State of New York to accept for filing petitioner's second amendment to a cooperative offering plan, and dismissed the CPLR article 78 proceeding; App. Div. affirmed.

NESBITT (AKIEME), PEOPLE v (89 AD3d 447):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 11/3/11; affirmance with dissents; leave to appeal granted by Renwick, J., 1/17/12; CRIMES - RIGHT TO COUNSEL - EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION - FAILURE TO PRESENT DEFENSE TO ASSAULT CHARGES OR REQUEST SUBMISSION OF LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSES - SERIOUS INJURY; Supreme Court, New York County convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of assault in the first degree, and sentenced him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 25 years; App. Div. affirmed.

PALMER (MICHAEL), PEOPLE v (88 AD3d 676):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 10/4/11; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 1/17/12; CRIMES - SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION ACT (SORA) (CORRECTION LAW ART. 6-C) - WHETHER DEFENDANT'S USE OF ALCOHOL AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENSE, WITHOUT MORE, CAN CONSTITUTE CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE OF DRUG OR ALCOHOL ABUSE UNDER SORA RISK FACTOR 11; Supreme Court, Kings County, after a hearing pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C, designated defendant a level two sex offender; App. Div. affirmed.

WILD v CATHOLIC HEALTH SYSTEM (85 AD3d 1715):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/17/11; modification; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 1/10/12; PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT FAILED TO PROPERLY INSTRUCT THE JURY WITH RESPECT TO THE ELEMENT OF PROXIMATE CAUSE - "SUBSTANTIAL CHANCE DOCTRINE"; Supreme Court, Erie County awarded plaintiffs money damages against defendants Buffalo Emergency Associates, LLP and Raquel Martin, D.O.; App. Div. modified by granting that part of the post-trial motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial with respect to the award of damages for loss of consortium only, and granted a new trial on that element of damages only unless plaintiffs stipulated to reduce the award of damages for loss of consortium to $200,000.

For January 27, 2012 through February 2, 2012, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

GARCIA (MIGUEL), PEOPLE v (85 AD3d 28):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 4/26/11; reversal; leave to appeal granted by Smith, J., 1/18/12; CRIMES - UNLAWFUL SEARCH AND SEIZURE - WHETHER THE POLICE HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASK THE OCCUPANTS OF A CAR WHETHER THEY HAVE ANY WEAPONS ONCE THE POLICE LAWFULLY STOP THE CAR FOR ANY REASON; INEVITABLE DISCOVERY DOCTRINE; Supreme Court, Bronx County convicted defendant, upon his guilty plea, of two counts of attempted unlawful possession of an air pistol or air rifle in violation of Administrative Code of the City of New York § 10-13(b)(1); App. Div. reversed, vacated the judgment of conviction, granted the suppression motion and dismissed the information.

NORTON (DARNELL), PEOPLE v (87 AD3d 1310):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 9/30/11; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Graffeo, J., 12/16/11; Rule 500.11 review pending; CRIMES - APPEAL - APPEAL WAIVER IN CONNECTION WITH GUILTY PLEA - APPELLATE DIVISION DID NOT SPECIFY WHETHER ITS AFFIRMANCE OF DEFENDANT'S CONVICTION WAS BASED ON THE VALIDITY OF THE APPEAL WAIVER OR ITS REVIEW AND REJECTION OF DEFENDANT'S EXCESSIVE SENTENCE CLAIM; Supreme Court, Monroe County convicted defendant, upon his guilty plea, of robbery in the first degree; App. Div. affirmed.