Return to New Filings Page


For February 7, 2014 through February 13, 2014, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

CATALANO v TANNER (112 AD3d 1299):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 12/27/13; reversal with dissents; Rule 500.11 review pending; NEGLIGENCE - MAINTENANCE OF PREMISES - DEFECTIVE RESTAURANT CHAIR - NOTICE OF DEFECTIVE CONDITION - CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE - REASONABLENESS OF DEFENDANT'S INSPECTION PRACTICES; RES IPSA LOQUITUR - LACK OF EXCLUSIVE CONTROL OF CHAIR; SUMMARY JUDGMENT; Supreme Court, Erie County, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint; App. Div. reversed, granted defendant's motion and dismissed the complaint.

CULLEN (WILLIAM), PEOPLE v (110 AD3d 1474):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 10/4/13; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Lippman, Ch.J., 1/24/14; CRIMES - WITNESSES - PRIOR CONSISTENT STATEMENT - WHETHER WITNESSES' STATEMENTS CONCERNING THE VICTIM'S PRIOR CONSISTENT STATEMENTS CONSTITUTED IMPROPER BOLSTERING; RIGHT TO COUNSEL - ALLEGED INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF TRIAL COUNSEL; PROOF OF OTHER CRIMES - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT THE CHALLENGED EVIDENCE WAS PROPERLY ADMITTED BECAUSE IT PLACED THE CHARGED CONDUCT IN CONTEXT AND PROVIDED NECESSARY BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE NATURE OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DEFENDANT AND THE VICTIM; Supreme Court, Onondaga County, convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of two counts of rape in the second degree, criminal sexual act in the second degree and three counts of incest in the second degree; App. Div. affirmed.

MITCHELL v NEW YORK UNIVERSITY (2014 NY Slip Op 30063[U]):
Supreme Court, New York County order of 1/14/14; grant of motion to dismiss; sua sponte examination whether the only question involved on the appeal is the validity of a statutory provision of the state or of the United States under the Constitution of the state or of the United States; MOTIONS AND ORDERS - CHALLENGE TO ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AS TIME-BARRED TO THE EXTENT IT CHALLENGED DEFENDANT UNIVERSITY'S DECISION TO BAR PLAINTIFF FROM THE UNIVERSITY AND FOR FAILING TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION FOR DEFAMATION, ASSAULT, BATTERY, INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, FALSE IMPRISONMENT, NEGLIGENCE, VIOLATION OF FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, UNJUST ENRICHMENT AND FRONT PAY; Supreme Court, New York County, granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred and/or for failure to state a cause of action, and denied plaintiff's cross motion for a default judgment.

NICHOLSON v INCORPORATED VILLAGE OF GARDEN CITY (112 AD3d 893):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 12/26/13; reversal; sua sponte examination whether the order appealed from, which remits this matter to Supreme Court "for further proceedings, including the entry of a judgment," finally determines the action/proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution, and whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; LOCAL LAWS - VALIDITY - CONSTITUTIONALITY OF REGULATION REZONING CORNER LOTS ON FOUR AVENUES IN VILLAGE; Supreme Court, Nassau County, in a hybrid action for a judgment declaring, among other things, that Local Law 4-2009 of the Village of Garden City is unconstitutional and proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Trustees of Incorporated Village of Garden City, dated August 13, 2009, resolving to enact Local Law 4-2009 of the Village of Garden City, denied that branch of defendants/respondents' motion which was for summary judgment, in effect, declaring that Local Law 4-2009 is not unconstitutional, and granted that branch of the plaintiffs/petitioners' cross motion which was for summary judgment, in effect, declaring that Local Law 4-2009 of the Village of Garden City is unconstitutional; App. Div. reversed the order insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of defendants' motion which was for summary judgment, in effect, declaring that Local Law 4-2009 of the Village of Garden City is not unconstitutional, denied that branch of plaintiffs' motion which was for summary judgment, in effect, declaring that Local Law 4-2009 of the Village of Garden City is unconstitutional, and remitted the matter to Supreme Court for further proceedings, including the entry of a judgment, among other things, declaring that Local Law 4-2009 of the Village of Garden City is not unconstitutional.

ROBLES v NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY (113 AD3d 437):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 1/14/14; reversal with dissents; Rule 500.11 review pending; MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS - TRIP AND FALL - NOTICE OF CLAIM - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION CORRECTLY HELD THAT DEFENDANT WAS ENTITLED TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT BECAUSE THE NOTICE OF CLAIM DID NOT DESCRIBE THE LOCATION OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT WITH SUFFICIENT PARTICULARITY, PLAINTIFF GAVE CONTRADICTORY VERSIONS OF THE ACCIDENT LOCATION AND DID NOT ADVISE DEFENDANT OF THE REVISED LOCATION UNTIL MORE THAN THREE YEARS AFTER THE ALLEGED ACCIDENT, AND THE AFFIDAVITS PLAINTIFF SUBMITTED IN OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION DID NOT RAISE AN ISSUE OF FACT; Supreme Court, New York County, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint; App. Div. reversed, granted defendants' motion, and directed the clerk to enter judgment dismissing the complaint.

For February 14, 2014 through February 20, 2014, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

BARRETO v METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (110 AD3d 630):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 10/31/13; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by App. Div., 2/11/14; LABOR - SAFE PLACE TO WORK - FALL INTO UNCOVERED MANHOLE - WHETHER DEFENDANTS WERE ENTITLED TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PLAINTIFF'S LABOR LAW § 240(1) CLAIM UPON THE GROUND THAT HIS FAILURE TO COVER THE MANHOLE AS DIRECTED WAS THE SOLE PROXIMATE CAUSE OF HIS INJURIES; PROPRIETY OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT DISMISSING CLAIMS FOR COMMON-LAW NEGLIGENCE AND FOR VIOLATIONS OF LABOR LAW §§ 200 AND 241(6); Supreme Court, New York County, granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against defendant IMS Safety, Inc., dismissing the complaint and all cross claims as asserted against defendants Metropolitan Transportation Authority and New York City Transit Authority, and dismissing the complaint and all claims as asserted against defendant City of New York; and denied plaintiff's cross motion for partial summary judgment as against defendant IMS on his common-law negligence and Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1) and 241(6) claims as against IMS and for partial summary judgment against defendants Metropolitan Transportation Authority, New York City Transit Authority and the City of New York on his claim as against them under Labor Law § 240(1); App. Div. affirmed.

ELMALIACH v BANK OF CHINA LIMITED (110 AD3d 192):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 9/17/13; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by App. Div., 2/6/14; CONFLICT OF LAWS - WHAT LAW GOVERNS - ACTION AGAINST CHINESE BANK BY ISRAELI NATIONALS - NEGLIGENCE CLAIM ARISING OUT OF ALLEGED ACTS THAT ENABLED TWO TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS TO PLAN, PREPARE AND UNDERTAKE ACTS OF TERRORISM IN ISRAEL - INTEREST ANALYSIS - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN DETERMINING THAT THE SUBSTANTIVE LAW OF ISRAEL APPLIED; BANKS AND BANKING - NEGLIGENCE - ISRAELI LAW - PROHIBITION AGAINST AIDING TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS; Supreme Court, New York County, denied defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint; App. Div. affirmed.

DUNN, MATTER OF (111 AD3d 1019):
3rd Dept. App. Div. order of 11/7/13; censure of attorney; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 2/18/14; ATTORNEY AND CLIENT - DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS - CENSURE; COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION PROPERLY GAVE COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL EFFECT TO A SANCTIONS DECISION BY A UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHICH IS NOT SUBJECT TO REVIEW IN THE FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM UNTIL THE UNDERLYING FEDERAL ACTION IS CONCLUDED; App. Div. found respondent guilty of the professional misconduct charged in the petition and censured her.

FLANDERS (PERNELL A.), PEOPLE v (111 AD3d 1263):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 11/8/13; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Sconiers, J., 1/28/14; CRIMES - JURORS - JURY INSTRUCTIONS - CLAIM THAT TRIAL COURT'S INSTRUCTION TO THE JURY CONSTRUCTIVELY AMENDED THE INDICTMENT, RENDERING IT DUPLICITOUS; MULTIPLE SHOTS FIRED FROM TWO FIREARMS; CONTINUING OFFENSE; WHETHER SHELL CASINGS WERE PROPERLY ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE; CLAIMED INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL; CLAIMED EXCESSIVE SENTENCE; County Court, Oneida County, convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree; App. div. affirmed.

PATROLMEN'S BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, INC., MATTER OF v CITY OF NEW YORK (112 AD3d 116):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 12/3/13; reversal with dissents; INJUNCTIONS - PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION - WHETHER PETITIONERS ESTABLISHED A LIKELIHOOD OF SUCCESS ON THE MERITS OF THE CLAIM TO BE ARBITRATED - WHETHER ARBITRATION AWARD IN PETITIONERS' FAVOR WOULD BE RENDERED INEFFECTUAL WITHOUT PROVISIONAL RELIEF; Supreme Court, New York County, granted the petition for a preliminary injunction enjoining respondents from denying or revoking "Release Time" to the individual petitioners, pending resolution of arbitration proceedings; App. Div. reversed, vacated the judgment, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

PLATEK v ALLSTATE INDEMNITY COMPANY:
Supreme Court, Erie County, judgment of 1/14/14, bringing up for review a 4th Dept. App. Div. order of 7/6/12; modification with dissents; INSURANCE - EXCLUSIONS - WATER DAMAGE - EXCEPTION FOR "EXPLOSION" - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE "EXPLOSION" EXCEPTION WAS AMBIGUOUS AND, THUS, HAD TO BE CONSTRUED IN FAVOR OF THE INSURED; Supreme Court, Erie County, granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, declared that plaintiffs' loss is covered by the subject insurance policy, directed defendant Allstate Indemnity Company to pay plaintiffs' claim and denied Allstate's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against it; App. Div. modified by vacating the declaration; Supreme Court severed the claims against defendant Allstate, and subsequently awarded plaintiffs damages in the sum of $110,000 based on the parties' stipulation.

RODRIGUEZ, MATTER OF v LaVALLEY (112 AD3d 1244):
3rd Dept. App. Div. order of 12/26/13; affirmance; sua sponte examination whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; PROCEEDING AGAINST BODY OR OFFICER - WHEN REMEDY AVAILABLE - CHALLENGE TO APPELLATE DIVISION ORDER AFFIRMING JUDGMENT DISMISSING CPLR ARTICLE 78 PETITION CHALLENGING PETITIONER'S UNDERLYING CONVICTION; Supreme Court, Clinton County, dismissed the petition; App. Div. affirmed.

YOHANAN, MATTER OF v KING (113 AD3d 971):
3rd Dept. App. Div. order of 1/23/14; confirmation of determination; sua sponte examination whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS - DENTISTS - DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS - ALLEGED VIOLATION OF PETITIONER'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS AS A RESULT OF (1) THE REGENTS REVIEW COMMITTEE'S NOT PROVIDING A COPY OF ITS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK CONSIDERED THE MATTER AND (2) THE BOARD OF REGENTS' FAILURE TO PROVIDE PETITIONER WITH REPORTS AND INFORMATION CONCERNING PENALTIES IMPOSED IN OTHER DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS - CHALLENGE TO PENALTY OF REVOCATION AS SO DISPROPORTIONATE TO THE OFFENSE AS TO SHOCK ONE'S SENSE OF FAIRNESS; App. Div. confirmed the determination of respondent Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York that revoked petitioner's license to practice dentistry in New York, and dismissed the CPLR article 78 petition.

For February 21, 2014 through February 27, 2014, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

BOYLE v STARWOOD HOTELS & RESORTS WORLDWIDE, INC. (110 AD3d 938):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 10/23/13; modification; leave to appeal granted by App. Div., 1/29/14; Rule 500.11 review pending; COURTS - FORUM NON CONVENIENS - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW IN AFFIRMING, WITH CONDITIONS, A SUPREME COURT ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS THIS PERSONAL INJURY ACTION ON THE GROUND OF FORUM NON CONVENIENS (CPLR 327[a]); Supreme Court, Westchester County, granted defendant's motion to dismiss the action on the ground of forum non conveniens, pursuant to CPLR 327(a); App. Div. modified by adding a provision conditioning the grant of the defendant's motion on the defendant stipulating (1) to accept service of process in the new action commenced by the plaintiffs in the United Kingdom, France, or in the United Arab Emirates upon the same causes of action as those asserted in the instant complaint, or, in the alternative, at the choice of the individual plaintiffs, to accept service of process in a new action or actions commenced separately by the plaintiffs in the United Kingdom, France, or the United Arab Emirates upon the same causes of action as those asserted separately on behalf of the individual plaintiffs in the instant complaint, and (2) to waive any defenses, including that of the statute of limitations, provided that the new action or actions are commenced within 30 days after service of the stipulation upon the plaintiffs; and, in the event that defendant fails to stipulate within 60 days after service upon it of a copy of the App. Div. decision and order, then reversed the order and denied the motion.

DOERR v GOLDSMITH (110 AD3d 453):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 10/3/13; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by App. Div., 2/6/14; ANIMALS - LIABILITY FOR INJURIES - DOG COLLIDING WITH BICYCLIST - NEGLIGENCE CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DOG'S OWNER; Supreme Court, New York County, denied defendant Smith's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against her; App. Div. affirmed.