Return to New Filings Page


For November 27, 2020 through December 3, 2020 , the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

HUNTERS FOR DEER v TOWN OF SMITHTOWN (186 AD3d 682):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 8/19/20; reversal; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 11/19/20; Local Laws--Preemption--Whether Smithtown Town Code § 160- 5 is preempted by Environmental Conservation Law § 11-0931(4)(a)(2) with regard to minimum setback limits for the discharge of a bow and arrow; Supreme Court, Suffolk County, denied that branch of the plaintiffs' motion which was for summary judgment on so much of the complaint as sought a declaration that chapter 160 of the Code of the Town of Smithtown is invalid as applied to the discharge setback of a bow and arrow, and granted that branch of the defendant's cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing that part of the complaint; App. Div. reversed, granted that branch of the plaintiffs' motion which was for summary judgment on so much of the complaint as sought a declaration that chapter 160 of the Code of the Town of Smithtown is invalid as applied to the discharge setback of a bow and arrow, denied that branch of the defendant's cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing that part of the complaint, and remitted the matter to Supreme Court for the entry of a judgment, inter alia, declaring that chapter 160 of the Code of the Town of Smithtown is invalid as applied to the discharge setback of a bow and arrow.

TCR SPORTS BROADCASTING HOLDING, LLP v WN PARTNER, LLC (187 AD3d 623):
App. Div., 1st order of 10/22/20; affirmance; bringing up for review 1ST Dept. App. Div. order of 7/13/17; affirmance; sua sponte examination of whether (1) the two- Justice dissent in the July 13, 2017 App. Div. order is on a question of law (see CPLR 5601[a], [d]); (2) the July 13, 2017 App. Div. order "necessarily affects" the December 9, 2019 Supreme Court judgment (see CPLR 5601[d]); and (3) a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right from the October 22, 2020 App. Div. order; Arbitration--Agreement of Arbitrate--Forum--Whether courts have the power, after vacating an arbitration award based on "evident partiality" related to the forum, to order rehearing in a forum other than that provided for in the parties' arbitration agreement; Supreme Court, New York County, among other things, denied respondent Washington Nationals Baseball Club, LLCs' (the Nationals') motion to confirm an arbitration award issued 6/30/14 by the Revenue Sharing Definitions Committee, granted the part of petitioner's motion seeking to vacate the award, and denied the part of petitioner's motion seeking to direct that a second arbitration proceed before an impartial panel unaffiliated with Major League Baseball (11/4/15 order); thereafter, denied the Nationals' motion to compel the parties to re-arbitrate the claim before the Revenue Sharing Definitions Committee, and granted petitioner's cross motion to stay the parties from compelling or conducting another arbitration of the dispute until the final determination of the appeals from the 11/4/15 Supreme Court order (7/11/16 order), thereafter, granted the Nationals' motion to confirm the arbitration award (8/22/19 order); thereafter, denied petitioner's motion to resettle the 8/22/19 order (11/14/19 order); thereafter, judgment in favor of the Nationals' (12/9/19 order); App. Div. affirmed judgment in favor of the Nationals, and dismissed appeals from 8/22/19 and 11/14/19 orders as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment (10/22/20 order).

WESTCHESTER FIRE INSURANCE CO. v SCHORSCH (186 AD3d 132):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 8/20/20; modification; leave to appeal granted by App. Div., 11/5/20; Insurance--Directors and Officers Liability Policy--Whether a directors and officers liability policy's bankruptcy exception, which allows claims asserted by the "bankruptcy trustee" or "comparative authority," applies to claims raised by a creditor trust, as a post-confirmation litigation trust, to restore coverage removed by the insured versus insured exclusion; Supreme Court, New York County, denied Excess Insurers' motions to dismiss defendant insureds' counterclaim for breach of contract; and thereafter, granted the motions of defendants Nicholas S. Schorsch, Edward M. Weil, Jr., William Kahane, Peter M. Budko, and Brian S. Block (defendants insureds) for partial summary judgment on their first counterclaim alleging breach of contract with respect to the insurance coverage obligations of plaintiff Westchester Fire Insurance Co., defendant Aspen American Insurance Co., defendant RSUI Indemnity Co. (collectively, Excess Insurers), declared Excess Insurers obligated to pay all defense and indemnity costs incurred in an action pending in Delaware, and found defendants insureds entitled to attorneys' fees incurred in defending against the instant declaratory judgment action; App. Div. modified, to deny defendant insureds' motion for partial summary judgment on their first counterclaim, to vacate the declaration that Excess Insurers are obligated to pay for indemnity costs incurred in the Creditor Trust Action, and to vacate the award of attorneys' fees incurred by defendants insureds in the instant action, and otherwise affirmed.

For December 4, 2020 through December 10, 2020 , the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

PUTLAND (DAVID G.), PEOPLE v (187 AD3d 1073):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 10/21/20; affirmance; sua sponte examination of whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; Crimes--Sex Offenders--Whether provisions of the Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA) requiring mandatory registration for juveniles convicted of certain crimes constitutes cruel and unusual punishment and violates a defendant's constitutional right to substantive due process; defendant, 15 years old at time of offense, prosecuted and convicted as an adult of sodomy in the first degree and murder in the second degree; County Court, Dutchess County, designated defendant a level three sexually violent offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C; App. Div. affirmed.

ROMINE v LAURITO (186 AD3d 913):
3rd Dept. App. Div. order of 8/6/20; affirmance; sua sponte examination of whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved in the August 6, 2020 App. Div. order to support an appeal as of right; Motions and Orders; Supreme Court, Ulster County, granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the second amended complaint; App. Div. affirmed.

SCHOCH v LAKE CHAMPLAIN OB-GYN, P.C. (184 AD3d 338):
3rd Dept. App. Div. order of 6/18/20; reversal; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 11/23/20; Insurance--Liability Insurance--Whether defendant employer was entitled to receive cash consideration resulting from the demutualization of an insurance fund where the employer purchased the insurance policy and paid all the premiums but where the employee is named as the sole insured on the policy; whether plaintiff is unjustly enriched by the receipt of the cash consideration resulting from demutualization of insurance fund; Supreme Court, Saratoga County, issued a declaration in defendant's favor; App. Div. reversed, denied defendant's cross motion for summary judgment, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, and declared that plaintiff is solely entitled to the $74,747.03 cash consideration from Medical Liability Mutual Insurance Company's demutualization, plus interest for the time the proceeds were in escrow, and defendant's claim thereto is invalid.

PATRICK S. (ANONYMOUS) v STATE OF NEW YORK (188 AD3d 699):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 11/4/20; affirmance; sua sponte examination of whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; Crimes--Sex Offenders--Whether imposition of Strict and Intensive Supervision and Treatment (SIST) conditions pursuant to the New York Mental Hygiene Law article 10 violated the constitutional rights of Patrick S.; Supreme Court, Westchester County, among other things, denied that branch of Patrick S.'s petition which was for the termination of his SIST regimen; App. Div. affirmed.

MATTER OF AUDREY A.T.:
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 10/16/20; sua sponte examination of whether the order appealed from finally determines the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution and whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; Attorney and Client--Attorney Discipline; Alleged constitutional violations in pending attorney discipline matter; App. Div., inter alia, (1) denied a motion to hold in abeyance a hearing before a Special Referee in an attorney disciplinary proceeding, and (2) directed the parties to proceed with the previously ordered hearing before the Special Referee.