Return to New Filings Page


For May 8, 2015 through May 14, 2015, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

BRANSTEN v STATE OF NEW YORK (2015 NY Slip Op 30422[U]):
Supreme Court, New York County judgment of 5/1/15; grant of summary judgment; sua sponte examination whether there is a jurisdictional predicate for a direct appeal pursuant to CPLR 5601(b)(2); JUDGES - JUDICIAL SALARIES - WHETHER APPLICATION TO PLAINTIFF JUDGES AND JUSTICES OF L. 2011, c. 491, § 2 AND AMENDED CIVIL SERVICE LAW § 167(8) VIOLATES THE COMPENSATION CLAUSE OF THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION; Supreme Court, New York County, granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on their complaint to the extent that it declared that L. 2011, c. 491, § 2 and the amended Civil Service Law § 167 (8), including the regulations adopted thereunder, are unconstitutional as applied to the Judges and Justices of the Unified Court System because these statutes diminish compensation of all such Judges and Justices, and denied defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

GUERIN (ZACHARY T.), PEOPLE v:
County Court, Cattaraugus County order of 5/30/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Pigott, J., 4/8/15; CRIMES - TRESPASSING - DEFENDANT TICKETED FOR WALKING ON POSTED LAND - DEFENDANT CHALLENGED TICKET ON GROUNDS THAT SIGNS POSTED WHERE HE WAS WALKING DID NOT COMPLY WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW § 11-2111(2)'S REQUIREMENT THAT THE SIGN STATE THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE LAWFUL OWNERS OF THE LAND; Persia Town Court convicted defendant of trespassing in violation of ECL § 11-2113(1); County Court affirmed.

HARRIS v THE UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK (127 AD3d 431):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 4/7/15; affirmance; sua sponte examination whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; JUDGMENTS - COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL - CHALLENGE TO APPELLATE DIVISION ORDER HOLDING THAT (1) PLAINTIFF WAS COLLATERALLY ESTOPPED FROM RELITIGATING THE ISSUE WHETHER DEFENDANT'S REASSIGNMENT OF HIS FACILITY HOUSING WAS ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS AND NOT RATIONALLY BASED, (2) PLAINTIFF'S CHALLENGE TO THE TERMINATION OF HIS EMPLOYMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT AS A CPLR ARTICLE 78 PROCEEDING AND WAS TIME-BARRED, AND (3) PLAINTIFF'S REMAINING ARGUMENTS WERE UNAVAILING - CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE TO 4-MONTH STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONTAINED IN CPLR 217(1); Supreme Court, New York County, granted defendant's motion to dismiss the cause of action for a declaratory judgment as to plaintiff's rights under a housing agreement and related relief; App. Div. affirmed.

JIANNARAS v ALFANT (124 AD3d 582):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 1/14/15; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by App. Div., 5/8/15; ACTIONS - CLASS ACTIONS - SETTLEMENT PURPORTING TO EXTINGUISH RIGHTS OF OUT-OF-STATE CLASS MEMBERS TO LITIGATE DAMAGES CLAIMS WITHOUT ABILITY TO OPT-OUT - WHETHER SUPREME COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN DENYING A MOTION TO APPROVE A SETTLEMENT OF THE PROPOSED CLASS ACTION BECAUSE IT DID NOT AFFORD NONRESIDENT CLASS MEMBERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO OPT-OUT AND PURSUE INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES - APPLICATION OF MATTER OF COLT INDUS. SHAREHOLDERS LITIG. (77 NY2d 185 [1991]); Supreme Court, Queens County, denied a motion made jointly by defendants and plaintiff-class representative to approve a settlement of a proposed non-opt-out class action; App. Div. affirmed.

SHERMAN v NEW YORK STATE THRUWAY AUTHORITY (120 AD3d 792):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 8/27/14; reversal; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 5/7/15; NEGLIGENCE - SNOW AND ICE - STORM IN PROGRESS - WHETHER DEFENDANT WAS ENTITLED TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT DISMISSING THE CLAIM UPON THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS A STORM IN PROGRESS WHEN PLAINTIFF SLIPPED AND FELL ON ICE - APPLICATION WHERE THERE IS NO LONGER ANY APPRECIABLE ACCUMULATION OF ICE OR SNOW WHEN ACCIDENT OCCURS; Court of Claims denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the claim; App. Div. reversed the order insofar as appealed from and granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the claim.

For May 15, 2015 through May 21, 2015, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

ADLER v QPI-VIII, LLC (124 AD3d 567):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 1/14/15; reversal; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 4/7/15; NEGLIGENCE - MAINTENANCE OF PREMISES - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ALLEGED DEFECT OF STEP WAS TRIVIAL AS A MATTER OF LAW AND DID NOT POSSESS THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A TRAP OR NUISANCE - DEFENDANTS' ENTITLEMENT TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT; Supreme Court, Queens County, denied defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint in an action to recover damages for personal injuries; App. Div. reversed and granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint.

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO. v AVANGUARD MEDICAL GROUP (127 AD3d 60):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 2/18/15; reversal; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 5/14/15; INSURANCE - NO-FAULT AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE - NECESSARY EXPENSES - FACILITY FEE FOR OFFICE-BASED SURGERY - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION CORRECTLY CONCLUDED THAT INSURANCE LAW § 5102 AND 11 NYCRR 68.5 DO NOT REQUIRE INSURERS TO PAY FACILITY FEES TO OFFICE-BASED SURGERY PRACTICES; Supreme Court, Nassau County, denied plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment declaring that they are not required to reimburse defendant for facility fees as payable first-party benefits under Insurance Law § 5102; App. Div. reversed, granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment declaring that they are not required to reimburse defendant for facility fees as payable first-party benefits under Insurance Law § 5102, and remitted the matter to Supreme Court for the entry of a judgment declaring that plaintiffs are not required to reimburse defendant for facility fees as payable first-party benefits under Insurance Law § 5102.

HODGE v COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER:
Supreme Court, Westchester County order of 3/4/15; grant of summary judgment; sua sponte examination whether the only question involved on the appeal is the constitutional validity of a statutory provision; NEGLIGENCE - DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT AGAINST COUNTY BROUGHT BY INMATE ASSAULTED BY ANOTHER INMATE AT COUNTY JAIL - WHETHER SUPREME COURT CORRECTLY GRANTED COUNTY SUMMARY JUDGMENT DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT; Supreme Court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment and directed the clerk to dismiss the complaint in this personal injury action brought by an inmate at the Westchester County jail who was assaulted by another inmate.

KEYSPAN GAS EAST CORPORATION v MUNICH REINSURANCE AMERICA, INC. (123 AD3d 402):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 12/2/14; modification; sua sponte examination whether substantial grounds support the claim that the order appealed from violates this Court's remittitur; INSURANCE - DISCLAIMER OF COVERAGE - WAIVER OF LATE NOTICE DEFENSE - WHETHER THE DECEMBER 2, 2014 APPELLATE DIVISION ORDER VIOLATES THIS COURT'S JUNE 10, 2014 REMITTITUR; Supreme Court, New York County, as relevant here, upon renewal, granted so much of defendants-insurers' motions for summary judgment as sought a declaration that defendants have no duty to defend or indemnify plaintiffs regarding environmental damage claims against the Bay Shore manufactured gas plant site, on the ground of plaintiffs' failure to provide timely notice under the respective policies, but denied the motions as to other sites; App. Div. modified the order to deny the motions as to the Bay Shore site and vacate the declaration, and otherwise affirmed; thereafter, the Court of Appeals reversed and remitted the case to the App. Div. for further proceedings in accordance with the Court's opinion; upon remittitur, the App. Div. modified the 2/2/12 order to deny the motion and vacate the declaration as to the Bay Shore site, on the ground that triable issues of fact exist as to whether the insurers waived their common- law defense of late notice, and remanded the matter to the motion court for further proceedings consistent with the App. Div.'s decision and order, and otherwise affirmed.

NOWLIN v VANROON (2015 NY Slip Op 70324[U]): ( 2014 NY Slip Op 91087[U]):
4th Dept. App. Div. orders of 4/14/15 and 11/21/14; denied motion to vacate dismissal of appeal and denied motion for leave to appeal to Court of Appeals; sua sponte examination whether the 4/14/15 and 11/21/14 App. Div. orders finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution, and whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; APPEALS - CHALLENGE TO APPELLATE DIVISION ORDERS THAT (1) DENIED PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR REARGUMENT OR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE COURT OF APPEALS FROM A PRIOR APPELLATE DIVISION ORDER AND (2) DENIED PLAINTIFF'S MOTION AS UNTIMELY INSOFAR AS IT SOUGHT TO VACATE THE DISMISSAL OF HIS APPEAL FOR FAILURE TO PERFECT AND DISMISSED THE MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO PERFECT THE APPEAL; App. Div. denied plaintiff's motion as untimely insofar as it sought to vacate dismissal of the appeal and otherwise dismissed the motion; thereafter, App. Div. denied plaintiff's motion for reargument or leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the 11/21/14 order.

PLOTCH v CITIBANK, N.A. (120 AD3d 1210):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 9/10/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 5/5/15; CONDOMINIUMS AND COOPERATIVES - LIENS - PRIORITY - WHETHER TWO MORTGAGES, CONSOLIDATED PRIOR TO THE FILING OF A LIEN FOR UNPAID CONDOMINIUM COMMON CHARGES, QUALIFY AS THE FIRST MORTGAGE OF RECORD FOR PURPOSES OF REAL PROPERTY LAW ART. 9-B; Supreme Court, Richmond County, denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the complaint and granted that branch of defendant's cross motion which was for summary judgment declaring that its consolidation agreement is the first mortgage of record against the subject property; App. Div. affirmed and remitted the entry of appropriate judgment.

PEOPLE ex rel. REID v C. AUGUSTUS (2015 NY Slip Op 62900[U]):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 2/2/15; denial of writ of habeas corpus; sua sponte examination whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; HABEAS CORPUS - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN DENYING THE PETITION SEEKING A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS; App. Div. denied petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus.

ZANETTI, MATTER OF v NEW YORK STATE TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL (128 AD3d 1131):
3rd Dept. App. Div. judgment of 5/7/15; confirmation of Tax Appeals Tribunal determination; sua sponte examination whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; TAXATION - PERSONAL INCOME TAX - RESIDENCY CLASSIFICATION - WHETHER THE DEFINITION OF "DAYS" IN A REGULATION OF THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION AND FINANCE (20 NYCRR 105.20[c]) IS INCONSISTENT WITH TAX LAW § 605(b)(1)(B), WHICH PROVIDES THAT A NONDOMICILIARY MAY BE CONSIDERED A NEW YORK RESIDENT FOR INCOME TAX PURPOSES IF HE OR SHE MAINTAINS A PERMANENT PLACE OF ABODE IN THIS STATE AND SPENDS IN EXCESS OF 183 DAYS OF THE YEAR HERE; CLAIMED CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION; App. Div. confirmed a determination of respondent Tax Appeals Tribunal sustaining a personal income tax assessment imposed under Tax Law article 22, and dismissed petitioners' CPLR article 78 petition.

For May 22, 2015 through May 28, 2015, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

BROWNLEE, MATTER OF v ANNUCCI (2015 NY Slip Op 72971[U]):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 5/12/15; dismissal of motion; sua sponte examination whether the App. Div. order 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; APPEAL - CHALLENGE TO ORDER DISMISSING AS PREMATURE UNDER 22 NYCRR 1000.13(f) PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO PERFECT AN APPEAL FROM A 1/12/15 SUPREME COURT ORDER; App. Div. dismissed as premature petitioner's motion for an extension of time to perfect the appeal taken from an order of Supreme Court, Seneca County, entered on 1/12/15.

DAVIDSON v STATE OF NEW YORK (2015 NY Slip Op 66738[U]):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 3/11/15; dismissal of motion; sua sponte examination whether the App. Div. 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; APPEALS - APPELLATE DIVISION - DISMISSAL OF MOTION FOR POOR PERSON RELIEF AND ASSIGNMENT OF COUNSEL; Court of Claims granted defendant's motion to dismiss the claim and dismissed the claim; App. Div. dismissed appellant's motion for poor person relief and assignment of counsel on the ground that the appeal was previously dismissed for failure to timely perfect.

COUNTY OF GENESEE, MATTER OF v SHAH (128 AD3d 1380):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 5/1/15; modification; sua sponte examination whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; PARTIES - CAPACITY TO SUE - PROCEEDING SEEKING REIMBURSEMENT FOR MEDICAID OVERBURDEN EXPENDITURES - WHETHER COUNTIES ARE PERSONS WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS SO THAT THEY MAY RAISE DUE PROCESS CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE; PETITIONER'S ENTITLEMENT TO RELIEF IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTING RESPONDENTS TO SEARCH THEIR RECORDS, LOCATE ALL UNREIMBURSED CLAIMS FOR OVERBURDEN EXPENDITURES MADE BY PETITIONER AND REIMBURSE PETITIONER FOR THOSE EXPENDITURES; Supreme Court, Genesee County, in a CPLR article 78 proceeding and a declaratory judgment action, among other things, directed respondents- defendants to pay petitioner-plaintiff's claims for reimbursement of overburden expenditures; App. Div. modified the judgment by denying the petition-complaint in its entirety and granting judgment in favor of respondents-defendants as follows: It is ADJUDGED and DECLARED that section 61 of part D of section 1 of chapter 56 of the Laws of 2012 has not been shown to be unconstitutional, and affirmed the judgment as modified.

COUNTY OF ONEIDA, MATTER OF v SHAH (128 AD3d 1381):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 5/1/15; modification; sua sponte examination whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; PARTIES - CAPACITY TO SUE - PROCEEDING SEEKING REIMBURSEMENT FOR MEDICAID OVERBURDEN EXPENDITURES - WHETHER COUNTIES ARE PERSONS WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS SO THAT THEY MAY RAISE DUE PROCESS CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE; PETITIONER'S ENTITLEMENT TO RELIEF IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTING RESPONDENTS TO SEARCH THEIR RECORDS, LOCATE ALL UNREIMBURSED CLAIMS FOR OVERBURDEN EXPENDITURES MADE BY PETITIONER AND REIMBURSE PETITIONER FOR THOSE EXPENDITURES; Supreme Court, Oneida County, in a CPLR article 78 proceeding and a declaratory judgment action, among other things, directed respondents- defendants to pay petitioner-plaintiff's pending claims for reimbursement of overburden expenditures in the amount of $3,123,878.56; App. Div. modified by denying the petition- complaint in its entirety and granting judgment in favor of respondents-defendants as follows: It is ADJUDGED and DECLARED that section 61 of part D of section 1 of chapter 56 of the Laws of 2012 has not been shown to be unconstitutional, and affirmed the judgment as modified.

HOWARD (QUANAPARKER), PEOPLE v (125 AD3d 1331):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 2/6/15; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 5/12/15; CRIMES - SEX OFFENDERS - SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION ACT (SORA) WHETHER THE COURTS BELOW ERRED IN DECLINING TO DEPART FROM THE SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURY OVERRIDE'S PRESUMPTIVE LEVEL THREE RISK DESIGNATION; County Court, Erie County, determined that defendant is a level 3 risk pursuant to SORA; App. Div. affirmed.

LEE, MATTER OF v PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (128 AD3d 458):
1st Dept. App. Div. judgment of 5/7/15; sua sponte examination whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; PROCEEDING AGAINST BODY OR OFFICER - CHALLENGE TO APPELLATE DIVISION ORDER DENYING APPLICATION PURSUANT TO CPLR ARTICLE 78 AND DISMISSING THE PETITION - ALLEGED REQUIREMENT THAT PROSECUTOR INFORM GRAND JURY AND COURT OF FINDINGS OF FIREARMS DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD; App. Div. denied petitioner's application pursuant to CPLR article 78 and dismissed the petition.

POPE v CITY OF NEW YORK (2015 NY Slip Op 67539[U]):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 3/19/15 and Supreme Court, New York County, order of 8/12/14; sua sponte examination whether the 3/19/15 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; and whether the 8/12/14 Supreme Court order appealed from finally determines the action within the meaning of the Constitution and 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 the United States; APPEAL - POOR PERSON - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR POOR PERSON RELIEF; Supreme Court, New York County, granted plaintiff's motion to the extent of directing that defendant produce certain individuals for deposition within 60 days, and granted defendant's motion to the extent of striking the language from a 3/4/14 order that stated "court reporter to be provided by the City and shall be deducted from any recovery that is recovered by plaintiff in this matter due to plaintiff's poor person status," and directing that plaintiff bear the expenses associated with the depositions; App. Div. denied plaintiff's motion for leave to prosecute, as a poor person, the appeals from the orders of Supreme Court entered on or about 3/4/14 and 8/12/14, respectively, for leave to have the appeal heard on the original record and upon a reproduced appellant's brief, and for other relief.