Return to New Filings Page
For October 26, 2012 through November 1, 2012, the following preliminary appeal
statements were filed:
ABRAHAM (AKIVA DANIEL), PEOPLE v (94 AD3d 1332):
3rd Dept. App. Div. order of 4/26/12; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by
Pigott, J., 10/12/12; CRIMES - INSURANCE FRAUD - CONCEALING CAUSE OF
FIRE - DEFENDANT IN INSURANCE FRAUD PROSECUTION ACQUITTED OF
ARSON - REPUGNANT OR INCONSISTENT VERDICT - SUFFICIENCY OF THE
EVIDENCE - ARGUMENT AND CONDUCT OF COUNSEL - ALLEGED
PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT; Supreme Court, Albany County convicted
defendant of insurance fraud in the second degree; App. Div. affirmed.
AKWESASNE CONVENIENCE STORE ASSOCIATION v STATE OF NEW YORK:
Supreme Court, Erie County order of 9/18/12; denial of summary judgment
motion; sua sponte examination whether a direct appeal as of right lies under CPLR
5601(b)(2); TAXATION - TAX ON CIGARETTES AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS -
CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE TO CHAPTER 134, PART D, OF THE 2010
SESSION LAWS - WHETHER STATUTE, AS APPLIED TO INDIAN TRADERS
AND RESERVATION CIGARETTE SELLERS, IMPERMISSIBLY BURDENS
INDIAN COMMERCE AND IS PREEMPTED BY THE INDIAN COMMERCE AND
SUPREMACY CLAUSES OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION; Supreme
Court, Erie County granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the
complaint and denied plaintiffs' cross motion for summary judgment awarding them
declaratory and injunctive relief.
CANGRO v REITANO (92 AD3d 483):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 2/9/12; affirmance; sua sponte examination whether a
substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right;
JUDGMENTS - RES JUDICATA; COMPLAINT - FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE
OF ACTION UPON WHICH RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED; LIBEL AND SLANDER -
PRIVILEGED STATEMENTS; Supreme Court, New York County granted defendant's
motion to dismiss the complaint; App. Div. affirmed.
JFK HOLDING COMPANY, LLC v CITY OF NEW YORK (98 AD3d 273):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 7/3/12; reversal with dissents; leave to appeal granted
by App. Div., 10/11/12; LANDLORD AND TENANT - LEASE - BREACH OF LEASE
CONDITION - DETERIORATION OF PREMISES - WHETHER TRIABLE ISSUES
OF FACT EXIST AS TO WHETHER THE SALVATION ARMY USED
COMMERCIALLY REASONABLE EFFORTS TO OBTAIN CERTAIN PAYMENTS
TO WHICH IT WAS ENTITLED UNDER A SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
OTHER DEFENDANTS - WHETHER DEFENDANT SALVATION ARMY WAS
NONETHELESS ENTITLED TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT UNDER A LIMITATION
OF DAMAGES PROVISION IN ITS LEASE - RES JUDICATA; Supreme Court, New
York County granted the motion of defendant Salvation Army to dismiss the complaint as
against it; App. Div. reversed, vacated the judgment in Salvation Army's favor, reinstated
the third cause of action for breach of contract and remanded the matter for further
proceedings.
KOCH, MATTER OF v SHEEHAN (95 AD3d 82):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 3/23/12; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court
of Appeals, 10/18/12; SOCIAL SERVICES - DISQUALIFICATION OR
TERMINATION AS A MEDICAID PROVIDER - SCOPE OF AUTHORITY OF
OFFICE OF MEDICAID INSPECTOR GENERAL - WHETHER THE APPELLATE
DIVISION ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE DETERMINATION OF THE OFFICE
OF THE NEW YORK STATE MEDICAID INSPECTOR GENERAL (OMIG) WAS
ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS - WHETHER OMIG HAD THE AUTHORITY TO
EXCLUDE PETITIONER FROM THE MEDICAID PROGRAM PURSUANT TO 18
NYCRR 515.7(e) BASED ON A CONSENT ORDER IN WHICH PETITIONER DID
NOT CONTEST HAVING COMMITTED MISCONDUCT BY PRACTICING
MEDICINE WITH NEGLIGENCE IN THE TREATMENT OF TWO EMERGENCY
ROOM PATIENTS WHO WERE NOT ALLEGED TO BE MEDICAID PATIENTS;
Supreme Court, Erie County granted the petition in a CPLR article 78 proceeding and
thereby vacated the determination by respondent New York State Medicaid Inspector
General to exclude petitioner from participating in the New York State Medicaid Program
and reinstated him retroactively to March 10, 2010 as a participating physician in the
Medicaid Program; App. Div. affirmed.
SCHREIER (DAVID W.), PEOPLE v (96 AD3d 1453):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/8/12; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Read,
J., 10/24/12; CRIMES - UNLAWFUL SURVEILLANCE - SUFFICIENCY OF
EVIDENCE - VICTIM VIDEOTAPED AT HOME THROUGH WINDOW -
WHETHER THE EVIDENCE WAS SUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH, AMONG OTHER
THINGS, THAT THE RECORDING WAS MADE "SURREPTITIOUSLY" AND AT A
PLACE AND TIME WHEN THE VICTIM HAD A REASONABLE EXPECTATION
OF PRIVACY (PENAL LAW § 250.45[1]); Monroe County Court convicted defendant,
upon a nonjury verdict, of unlawful surveillance in the second degree; App. Div.
affirmed.
For November 2, 2012 through November 8, 2012, the following preliminary appeal
statements were filed:
PLAZA v NEW YORK HEALTH AND HOSPITALS CORPORATION (97 AD3d 466):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 7/17/12; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by App.
Div., 10/16/12; Rule 500.11 review pending; MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS -
NOTICE OF CLAIM - LATE NOTICE - GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW § 50-e -
WHETHER DEFENDANT ACQUIRED ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE
ESSENTIAL FACTS CONSTITUTING CLAIM VIA MEDICAL RECORDS;
SUMMARY JUDGMENT - ISSUE OF FACT; Supreme Court, Bronx County granted
defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint; App. Div. affirmed.
PIGNATARO (ANTHONY S.), PEOPLE v (93 AD3d 1250):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 3/16/12; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Read,
J., 10/24/12; CRIMES - SENTENCE - POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION - WHETHER
A TRIAL COURT IS AUTHORIZED TO RESENTENCE A DEFENDANT TO A
TERM OF IMPRISONMENT WITHOUT POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION WHEN
THE PEOPLE CONSENT - PENAL LAW § 70.85; CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE
TO PENAL LAW § 70.85 AND CORRECTION LAW § 601-d AS APPLIED TO
DEFENDANT; SUFFICIENCY OF PLEA ALLOCUTION; TRIAL COURT'S
REFUSAL TO ALLOW WITHDRAWAL OF PLEA; Supreme Court, Erie County
resentenced defendant pursuant to Penal Law § 70.85; App. Div. affirmed.
THOMAS (ADRIAN P.), PEOPLE v (93 AD3d 1019):
3rd Dept. App. Div. order of 3/22/12; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by
Smith, J., 10/23/12; CRIMES - WITNESSES - EXPERT WITNESS - WHETHER
TRIAL COURT ERRED IN NOT ADMITTING EXPERT TESTIMONY ON THE
SUBJECT OF FALSE AND COERCED CONFESSIONS; VOLUNTARINESS OF
CONFESSION - POLICE THREATS TO ARREST DEFENDANT'S WIFE;
SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT CONVICTION FOR DEPRAVED
INDIFFERENCE MURDER; JUROR NOTES ON JURY INSTRUCTIONS; Supreme
Court, Rensselaer County convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of murder in the
second degree; App. Div. affirmed.
For November 9, 2012 through November 15, 2012, the following preliminary appeal
statements were filed:
CARTER (DARNELL D.), PEOPLE v (96 AD3d 1520):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/15/12; modification; leave to appeal granted by
Ciparick, J., 10/4/12; CRIMES - SENTENCE - CONCURRENT AND CONSECUTIVE
TERMS - WHETHER CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES UNDER PENAL LAW §
70.25(2) WERE PERMISSIBLE WHERE DEFENDANT WAS CONVICTED OF
MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE AND POSSESSION OF A WEAPON IN THE
SECOND DEGREE, AND THE POSSESSION CHARGE DID NOT REQUIRE
INTENT AS AN ELEMENT; Niagara County Court convicted defendant, upon a jury
verdict, of two counts of murder in the second degree, two counts of robbery in the first
degree, criminal use of a firearm in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon
in the second degree; App. Div. modified by directing that all sentences imposed shall run
concurrently.
GRANGER, MATTER OF v MISERCOLA (96 AD3d 1694):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/29/12; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court
of Appeals, 10/30/12; PARENT AND CHILD - VISITATION - WHETHER THERE IS
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD TO SUPPORT A GRANT OF
VISITATION RIGHTS TO AN INCARCERATED PARENT; STANDARD OF
REVIEW; BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD - FAMILY COURT ACT ARTICLE 6;
Family Court, Jefferson County granted the father's petition for visitation; App. Div.
affirmed.
ROCKY POINT DRIVE-IN, L.P. v TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN (93 AD3d 653):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 3/6/12; reversal; leave to appeal granted by Court of
Appeals, 10/25/12; MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS - ZONING - NONCONFORMING
USE - DELAY IN PROCESSING OF SITE PLAN APPLICATION - WHETHER
APPELLATE DIVISION MISAPPLIED THE "SPECIAL FACTS EXCEPTION" BY
REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO PROVE THAT DEFENDANTS ACTED IN BAD FAITH
IN DELAYING THE PROCESSING OF THE APPLICATION; DECLARATORY
JUDGMENT ACTION; Supreme Court, Suffolk County granted judgment in favor of
plaintiff and against defendants declaring that defendants' intentional bad faith delay in
reviewing and processing plaintiff's site plan application constitutes "special facts" which
entitle plaintiff to have its site plan application reviewed in accordance with the zoning
designation that was in effect on the day that plaintiff's site plan application was filed, and
that plaintiff is not required to apply for or obtain a variance; App. Div. reversed and
declared that plaintiff is not entitled to have its site plan application reviewed in
accordance with the zoning designation that was in effect on the day that plaintiff's site
plan application was filed, and dismissed the cross appeal as academic.