Return to New Filings Page


For January 16, 2015 through January 22, 2015, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

CANGRO v PARK SOUTH TOWERS ASSOCIATES (123 AD3d 602):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 12/16/14; dismissal; sua sponte examination whether the order appealed from finally determines the action within the meaning of the Constitution and whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; MOTIONS AND ORDERS - CHALLENGE TO APPELLATE DIVISION ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL FROM A SUPREME COURT ORDER DENYING REARGUMENT AS TAKEN FROM A NON- APPEALABLE PAPER; Supreme Court, New York County, denied plaintiff's motion for reargument of an order granting defendants' motions to dismiss plaintiff's complaint; App. Div. dismissed appeal as taken from a non-appealable paper.

CONNOLLY (JONATHAN J.), PEOPLE v (118 AD3d 1449):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/20/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Read, J., 1/6/15; CRIMES - EVIDENCE - RESTITUTION - EVIDENTIARY BASIS FOR AMOUNT - WHETHER THE PROCEDURES USED AT DEFENDANT'S RESTITUTION HEARING COMPORTED WITH PENAL LAW § 60.27 AND CPL 400.30 WHERE COUNTY COURT RELIED ON THE TRANSCRIPT AND EXHIBITS FROM A HEARING PREVIOUSLY CONDUCTED BY A JUDICIAL HEARING OFFICER; WHETHER THE DELAY IN IMPOSING RESTITUTION DIVESTED THE COURT OF JURISDICTION; WHETHER COUNSEL PROVIDED INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE; County Court, Genesee County, determined that Erie Insurance Company is entitled to restitution of $31,796.69 from defendant; App. Div. affirmed.

DAVIDSON v STATE OF NEW YORK:
Court of Claims order of 10/7/14; denial of reargument; sua sponte examination whether the order appealed from finally determines the action within the meaning of the Constitution and whether any jurisdictional basis exists for an appeal as of right; MOTIONS AND ORDERS - DENIAL OF REARGUMENT OF A COURT OF CLAIMS ORDER DENYING CLAIMANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; Court of Claims denied claimant's motion to reargue a Court of Claims order entered 4/3/14, which denied claimant's motion for summary judgment.

MICHAEL O.F., MATTER OF (2014 NY Slip Op 89334[U]; 119 AD3d 785):
2nd Dept. App. Div. orders of 11/10/14 and 7/16/14; denial of motion (11/10/14 order) and affirmance (7/16/14 order); sua sponte examination whether the 11/10/14 App. Div. order finally determines the proceedings within the meaning of the Constitution, whether the 7/16/14 App. Div. order finally determines the proceedings within the meaning of the Constitution, and whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; PARENT, CHILD AND FAMILY - ABUSED OR NEGLECTED CHILD - APPELLATE DIVISION ORDER AFFIRMING DENIAL OF MOTION TO VACATE FACT-FINDING ORDER; Family Court, Richmond County, denied Fausat O's motion to vacate a fact-finding order of the same court dated 4/2/12, and two dispositional orders of the same court, dated 6/27/12, and 6/28/12, respectively, made upon her failure to appear at the fact-finding and dispositional hearings; App. Div. (1) dismissed as academic, the appeal from so much of the order dated 4/24/13, as denied those branches of the motion which were to vacate the dispositional orders, as the periods of placement and supervision have expired and Joseph A., Jr., has reached 18 years of age; and (2) affirmed the order dated 4/24/13 insofar as it denied that branch of the motion which was to vacate the fact-finding order dated 4/2/12; thereafter, App. Div., among other things, denied a pro se motion by Fausat O., in effect, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.

GRAY (ROY), PEOPLE v (116 AD3d 480):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 4/8/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Smith, J., 12/18/14; CRIMES - RIGHT TO COUNSEL - EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION - FAILURE TO MOVE TO REOPEN SUPPRESSION HEARING AFTER TRIAL TESTIMONY ESTABLISHED THAT DEFENDANT HAD "A STRONGER ARGUMENT THAT HIS WRITTEN STATEMENT WAS NOT ATTENUATED" THAN THE APPELLATE DIVISION BELIEVED WHEN IT PREVIOUSLY REVERSED THE TRIAL COURT'S GRANT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS THAT STATEMENT; EVIDENCE - AMMUNITION OF TYPE CAPABLE OF BEING USED IN HOMICIDE - WHETHER DEFENDANT WAS PREJUDICED BY THE ADMISSION INTO EVIDENCE OF LIVE AMMUNITION FOUND WHEN HIS HALF-BROTHER WAS ARRESTED; Supreme Court, Bronx County, convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree, and sentenced him to a term of 25 years to life; thereafter, Supreme Court denied defendant's CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment of conviction; App. Div. affirmed.

RAM I, LLC, MATTER OF v NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL (123 AD3d 102):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 10/7/14; reversal; leave to appeal granted by App. Div., 1/6/15; LANDLORD AND TENANT - RENT REGULATION - LUXURY DEREGULATION OF RENT-CONTROLLED APARTMENT UNAVAILABLE FOLLOWING ACCEPTANCE OF CERTAIN TAX BENEFITS - WHETHER AN APARTMENT THAT WAS SUBJECT TO RENT CONTROL PRIOR TO RECEIVING J-51 TAX BENEFITS REMAINS EXEMPT FROM LUXURY DEREGULATION BY VIRTUE OF ITS RENT-CONTROLLED STATUS AFTER THE J-51 BENEFITS EXPIRE, NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT IT WAS OTHERWISE QUALIFIED FOR LUXURY DEREGULATION; WHETHER DHCR'S INTERPRETATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK § 26-403(e)(2)(j), AS APPLIED TO THIS CASE, VIOLATES THE OWNER'S EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS; Supreme Court, New York County, granted the CPLR article 78 petition of RAM I LLC seeking annulment of DHCR's determination dated 10/26/11, that the subject apartment was exempt from high-rent/high-income rent deregulation pursuant to Administrative Code of the City of New York § 26-403(e)(2)(j); App. Div. reversed, denied the petition, and dismissed the proceeding.

For January 23, 2015 through January 29, 2015, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

MENDEZ (EDWIN), PEOPLE v (116 AD3d 513):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 4/10/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Smith, J., 12/12/14; Rule 500.11 review pending; CRIMES - JURORS - RESPONSE TO JURY INQUIRIES - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT, ALTHOUGH THE RECORD WAS SILENT REGARDING THE TRIAL COURT'S RESPONSES TO THREE JURY NOTES, REVERSAL WAS NOT REQUIRED BECAUSE THE JURY NOTES REQUESTED MATERIALS NOT IN EVIDENCE AND THUS WERE NOT SUBSTANTIVE INQUIRIES REQUIRING COMPLIANCE WITH CPL 310.30 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN PEOPLE v O'RAMA (78 NY2d 270 [1991]), AND ONLY NECESSITATED THE MINISTERIAL ACTION OF INFORMING THE JURY THAT NONE OF THE REQUESTED ITEMS WERE IN EVIDENCE - NOTES REQUESTING TRANSCRIPTS OF RECORDED TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS AND WHETHER THERE WERE ANY 911 CALLS RELATED TO THE INCIDENT; JUSTIFICATION - WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT IMPROPERLY LIMITED DEFENDANT'S EVIDENCE OF COMPLAINANT'S PRIOR VIOLENT ACTS; Supreme Court, New York County, convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the second degree, and sentenced him, as a second felony offender, to a term of seven years; App. Div. affirmed.

MIRANDA (NELSON), PEOPLE v (44 Misc 3d 140(A)):
App. Term 1st Dept. order of 8/22/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Lippman, Ch.J., 1/14/15; CRIMES - UNLAWFUL SEARCH AND SEIZURE - SEARCH OF BACKPACK INCIDENT TO LAWFUL ARREST - WHETHER THE WARRANTLESS SEARCH INCIDENT TO ARREST WAS REASONABLE; WHETHER THE ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT WAS JURISDICTIONALLY DEFECTIVE; Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County, convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of six counts of attempted possession of burglar's tools and three counts of attempted petit larceny and imposed sentence; App. Term affirmed.

PS 157 LOFTS LLC v AUSTIN (2014 NY Slip Op 89036[U]):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 11/6/14; denial of motion; pending motion to dismiss the appeal; PUBLIC HOUSING - SUCCESSION RIGHTS - TWO-YEAR RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT - CLAIMED IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACT OBLIGATION; CLAIMED DEPRIVATION OF RIGHT TO JURY TRIAL; CLAIMED DUE PROCESS VIOLATION; App. Div. denied respondents' motion for renewal and reargument of its 7/24/14 order or, in the alternative, leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.

PS 157 LOFTS LLC v AUSTIN (2014 NY Slip Op 78635[U]):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 7/24/14; denial of motion; sua sponte examination of whether the order finally determines the action within the meaning of the Constitution and whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; PUBLIC HOUSING - SUCCESSION RIGHTS - TWO-YEAR RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT - CLAIMED IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACT OBLIGATION; CLAIMED DEPRIVATION OF RIGHT TO JURY TRIAL; CLAIMED DUE PROCESS VIOLATION; Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County, denied petitioner's motion for summary judgment on the holdover petition; App. Term reversed, granted petitioner's motion for summary judgment, and awarded final judgment in favor of petitioner on its cause of action for possession; App. Div. denied respondents' motion for leave to appeal.

YANIVETH R. v LTD REALTY CO. (120 AD3d 1142):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 9/25/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 12/18/14; LANDLORD AND TENANT - LANDLORD'S DUTY TO REMOVE LEAD PAINT - WHETHER INFANT EXPOSED TO LEAD PAINT RESIDED IN APARTMENT - INFANT CARED FOR IN HER GRANDMOTHER'S APARTMENT 10-12 HOURS PER DAY; NEGLIGENCE - VIOLATION OF STATUTORY DUTY - ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF CITY OF NEW YORK §§ 27- 2056.3, 27-2056.5; SUMMARY JUDGMENT; Supreme Court, Bronx County, among other things, granted defendant LTD Realty Co.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it; App. Div. affirmed.

RCM ELMWOOD LLC v NIZNIK:
Monroe County Court order of 12/2/14; denial of motion; sua sponte examination of whether the order finally determines the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution and whether an appeal lies to the Court of Appeals from the order of County Court; LANDLORD AND TENANT - EVICTION - MOTION TO STAY WARRANT OF EVICTION; Brighton Town Court granted the relief sought by the landlord for removal of the holdover tenant, found the landlord entitled to a warrant of eviction, but stayed execution of a warrant of eviction to 11/30/14; County Court, Monroe County, denied tenant's motion for a stay of the warrant of eviction.

MATTER OF KENNETH S. (121 AD3d 593):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 10/28/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 1/20/15; CRIMES - UNLAWFUL SEARCH AND SEIZURE - WHETHER POLICE MAY LAWFULLY TAKE A JUVENILE INTO CUSTODY FOR VIOLATING A PAROLE CONDITION SET BY A COURT AS A CONDITION FOR RELEASE PENDING TRIAL; WHETHER POLICE MAY TRANSPORT A MINOR DETAINED FOR TRUANCY TO A POLICE STATION RATHER THAN TO SCHOOL; SUPPRESSION HEARING - DENIAL OF MOTION - WHETHER POLICE WERE JUSTIFIED IN CONDUCTING WARRANTLESS SEARCH OF SUSPECTED TRUANT'S BOOK BAG; Family Court, New York County, adjudicated Kenneth S. a juvenile delinquent upon his admission that he committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute unlawful possession of an air pistol, and placed him on probation for a period of 18 months; App. Div. affirmed.

TORRES v JONES (120 AD3d 572):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 8/13/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 1/13/15; TORTS - CIVIL RIGHTS - FALSE ARREST, FALSE IMPRISONMENT AND UNREASONABLE SEIZURE - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN HOLDING THAT PLAINTIFF FAILED TO RAISE A TRIABLE ISSUE OF FACT REGARDING THE EXISTENCE OF PROBABLE CAUSE FOR HER ARREST; MALICIOUS PROSECUTION - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN HOLDING THAT PLAINTIFF FAILED TO REBUT THE PRESUMPTION OF PROBABLE CAUSE CREATED BY THE GRAND JURY'S INDICTMENT AND FAILED TO RAISE A TRIABLE ISSUE OF FACT THAT HER ARREST AND PROSECUTION WERE MOTIVATED BY ACTUAL MALICE; QUALIFIED IMMUNITY; APPEARANCE BY INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANT IN ACTION; Supreme Court, Queens County, in an 8/10/12 order, among other things, granted defendant City of New York's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint in Action No. 1 insofar as asserted against it; Supreme Court, in an 11/30/12 judgment, awarded judgment in favor of defendants New York City Police Department, Irma Santiago, Denitor Guerra, and Erik Hendriks and against plaintiff, and dismissed the complaint in Action No. 2 insofar as asserted against them; App. Div. affirmed the order and judgment.