Return to New Filings Page
For October 16, 2015 through October 22, 2015, the following preliminary
appeal statements were filed:
FISHER (KEVIN), PEOPLE v (119 AD3d 426):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 7/3/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Rivera,
J., 10/5/15; CRIMES - HINDERING PROSECUTION - WHETHER DEFENDANT
SHOULD HAVE BEEN PERMITTED TO WITHDRAW HIS PLEA OF GUILTY TO
HINDERING PROSECUTION WHERE THE PERSON HE RENDERED CRIMINAL
ASSISTANCE TO WAS ACQUITTED OF THE UNDERLYING FELONY AT TRIAL
BEFORE JUDGMENT WAS ENTERED AGAINST DEFENDANT; WHETHER
DEFENDANT'S GUILTY PLEA WAS KNOWING, INTELLIGENT AND
VOLUNTARY WHERE THE PROSECUTION DID NOT DISCLOSE CERTAIN
WITNESS INTERVIEW NOTES; Supreme Court, New York County, convicted
defendant, upon his guilty plea, of hindering prosecution in the second degree, and
sentenced him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 1 1/2 to 3 years; App. Div.
affirmed.
For October 23, 2015 through October 29, 2015, the following preliminary
appeal statements were filed:
PEOPLE ex rel. BELLON O/B/O YADGAROVA v YONATONOV:
Order to show cause that Justice Collen D. Duffy declined to sign on 8/26/15; sua
sponte examination whether the paper appealed from is an order or judgment from which
an appeal to the Court of Appeals may be taken, and whether any jurisdictional basis
otherwise exists for an appeal as of right pursuant to CPLR 5601(b); PARENT, CHILD
AND FAMILY - CHALLENGE TO DECISION BY INDIVIDUAL APPELLATE
DIVISION JUSTICE DECLINING TO SIGN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR,
AMONG OTHER THINGS, AN ORDER GRANTING A HEARING TO DETERMINE
CHILD CUSTODY AND VISITATION AND A STAY OF A FAMILY COURT
ORDER DISMISSING A CHILD CUSTODY PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 6 OF THE
FAMILY COURT ACT FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION;
Appellate Division Justice declined to sign an order to show cause that sought, among
other things, an order granting a hearing to determine child custody and visitation, and a
stay of a Family Court order dismissing a child custody petition under Article 6 of the
Family Court Act for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
RAMSEY (NORMAN E.), PEOPLE v:
Washington County Court order of 5/27/15; dismissal of appeal; leave to appeal
granted by Rivera, J., 10/16/15; CRIMES - APPEAL - WHETHER DEFENDANT WAS
REQUIRED TO SUBMIT AN AFFIDAVIT OF ERRORS UPON TAKING AN
APPEAL TO COUNTY COURT, WHERE HE PROVIDED A TRANSCRIPT OF THE
PROCEEDING DERIVED FROM AN AUDIO RECORDING OF THE UNDERLYING
PROCEEDING INSTEAD OF A TRANSCRIPTION BY A COURT STENOGRAPHER
- CPL 460.10(3); Hudson Falls Village Court convicted defendant, upon his guilty plea,
of the crime of forcible touching, and imposed a sentence.
STONEHILL CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC v BANK OF THE WEST (127 AD3d 429):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 4/7/15; reversal; leave to appeal granted by Court of
Appeals, 10/22/15; CONTRACTS - FORMATION OF CONTRACT - OFFER AND
ACCEPTANCE - WHETHER DEFENDANT BANK OF THE WEST CLEARLY AND
UNEQUIVOCALLY ACCEPTED PLAINTIFFS' OFFER TO PURCHASE A LOAN
WHERE DEFENDANT STATED THAT IT WOULD NOT BE BOUND WITHOUT
AN EXECUTED WRITING; Supreme Court, New York County, granted plaintiffs'
motion for summary judgment on its breach of contract cause of action and entered
judgment accordingly; App. Div. reversed, granted defendant Bank of the West's cross
motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and dismissed the complaint
against that defendant.
TURTURRO v CITY OF NEW YORK (127 AD3d 732):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 4/1/15; modification and affirmance; leave to appeal
granted by Court of Appeals, 10/20/15; MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS - TORT
LIABILITY - WHETHER THE MUNICIPAL DEFENDANT ESTABLISHED ITS
ENTITLEMENT TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR ITS TRAFFIC PLANNING
DECISION REGARDING A ROADWAY FOR WHICH IT HAD RECEIVED
COMPLAINTS OF SPEEDING AND LACK OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS - WHETHER
PLAINTIFFS FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT ANY ACT OR OMISSION BY THE
MUNICIPAL DEFENDANT WAS A PROXIMATE CAUSE OF THE INJURIES TO
AN INFANT PLAINTIFF HIT BY A SPEEDING CAR; WHETHER PLAINTIFFS
WERE PROPERLY ALLOWED TO ADDRESS AT TRIAL THE MANNER IN
WHICH THE MUNICIPAL DEFENDANT RESPONDED TO COMPLAINTS OF
SPEEDING AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT MATTER; Supreme Court, Kings County,
entered judgment upon a jury verdict finding, among other things, defendant City of New
York 40% at fault for the happening of the accident and, among other things, denied
defendant City of New York's motion pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) seeking to set aside the
verdict against it on the issue of liability; App. Div. (1) modified the judgment by deleting
the provision thereof awarding plaintiff Elida Turturro the principal sum of $75,000 for
the loss of the infant plaintiff's services, and substituting therefor a provision dismissing
that cause of action, and by deleting the provisions thereof awarding damages to the
infant plaintiff in the principal sums of $6,000,000 for past pain and suffering and
$10,000,000 for future pain and suffering; (2) affirmed the judgment as so modified; and
(3) remitted the matter to Supreme Court for a new trial on the issues of damages for past
and future pain and suffering, unless within 30 days after service upon the plaintiffs of a
copy of the court's decision and order, the plaintiffs serve and file in the office of the
Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, a written stipulation consenting to reduce the
amount of damages for past pain and suffering from the principal sum of $6,000,000 to
the principal sum of $3,000,000, and to further reduce the amount of damages for future
pain and suffering from the principal sum of $10,000,000 to the principal sum of
$7,000,000, and the entry of an appropriate amended judgment accordingly; and (4) in the
event that the plaintiffs so stipulate, affirmed the judgment as so reduced and amended;
plaintiffs stipulated to the reduced award and an amended judgment was entered
accordingly.