Return to New Filings Page
For July 3, 2015 through July 9, 2015, the following preliminary appeal
statements were filed:
BANK (HERMAN), PEOPLE v (124 AD3d 1376):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 1/2/15; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by
Lippman, Ch.J., 6/22/15; CRIMES - RIGHT TO COUNSEL - EFFECTIVE
REPRESENTATION - CLAIM THAT DEFENDANT WAS DEPRIVED OF
OPPORTUNITY TO PLEAD TO LESSER SENTENCE BY COUNSEL'S
MISUNDERSTANDING OF LAW AND INCORRECT ADVICE DURING PLEA
NEGOTIATIONS - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION ERRED IN
CONCLUDING THAT DEFENDANT WAS NOT DEPRIVED OF THE EFFECTIVE
ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL DURING PLEA NEGOTIATIONS; County Court,
Monroe County, denied defendant's motion to vacate the judgment of conviction pursuant
to CPL 440.10; App. Div. affirmed.
BOND v LICHTENSTEIN (129 AD3d 535):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 6/16/15; affirmance; sua sponte examination whether
the 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; JUDGMENTS - FOREIGN JUDGMENT - COMITY -
SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON A HONG KONG JUDGMENT AWARDING
CHILD SUPPORT; Supreme Court, New York County, granted plaintiff's motion for
summary judgment in lieu of a complaint, and denied defendant's motion to disqualify
plaintiff's attorneys; Supreme Court then awarded plaintiff the total sum of $599,644.76;
App. Div. affirmed.
CLARK (PRINCE), PEOPLE v (129 AD3d 1):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 4/29/15; affirmance with dissents; leave to appeal
granted by Miller, J., 6/29/15; CRIMES - RIGHT TO COUNSEL - EFFECTIVE
REPRESENTATION - TRIAL COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO REQUEST THAT THE
COURT CHARGE THE JURY ON THE POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE DEFENSE OF
JUSTIFICATION - TRIAL COURT'S FAILURE TO MAKE A JUSTIFICATION
CHARGE TO THE JURY SUA SPONTE; CLAIMED DUE PROCESS VIOLATION;
Supreme Court, Kings County, convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of murder in the
second degree and assault in the second degree, and imposed sentence; App. Div.
affirmed.
CHARITE v DUANE READE, INC. (120 AD3d 1378):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 9/24/14; reversal; leave to appeal granted by Court of
Appeals, 6/30/15; CIVIL RIGHTS - ELECTION OF REMEDIES - RETALIATION IN
EMPLOYMENT - PRIOR ACTION - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION
ERRED IN DETERMINING THAT PLAINTIFF'S CAUSE OF ACTION FOR
UNLAWFUL RETALIATION IN EMPLOYMENT IN VIOLATION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK §8-107 WAS BARRED
BY THE ELECTION OF REMEDIES PROVISION IN LABOR LAW §740(7); Supreme
Court, Kings County, in an action to, among other things, recover damages for unlawful
retaliation in employment in violation of Administrative Code of the City of New York
§8-107, denied, without prejudice, so much of the motion by defendants Duane Reade,
Inc., Walgreen Company, Inc., Walgreen Eastern Co., Inc. that, pursuant to CPLR
3211(a), sought to dismiss the first cause of action as asserted against them; App. Div.
reversed, granted that branch of defendants' motion which was to dismiss the first cause
of action as asserted against them.
HARDEE (STANLEY), PEOPLE v (126 AD3d 626):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 3/26/15; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by
Acosta, J., 6/18/15; Rule 500.11 review pending; CRIMES - UNLAWFUL SEARCH
AND SEIZURE - WHETHER LIMITED SEARCH OF CAR STOPPED FOR TRAFFIC
VIOLATIONS WAS JUSTIFIED AFTER DEFENDANT HAD BEEN REMOVED
FROM THE CAR AND FRISKED - PEOPLE v TORRES (74 NY2d 224 [1989]);
Supreme Court, New York County, convicted defendant of criminal possession of a
weapon in the second degree, and sentenced him, as a persistent violent felony offender,
to a term of 16 years to life; App. Div. affirmed.
MILLER (JAMES), PEOPLE v (122 AD3d 492):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 11/18/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by
Abdus-Salaam, J., 7/1/15; CRIMES - JURORS - SELECTION OF JURY -
QUESTIONING OF PROSPECTIVE JURORS - WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT
ERRED IN PRECLUDING DEFENDANT FROM QUESTIONING PROSPECTIVE
JURORS DURING VOIR DIRE REGARDING WHETHER THEY COULD
DISREGARD A CONFESSION IF THEY FOUND IT TO BE INVOLUNTARY
WHERE THE PEOPLE HAD NOT YET DECIDED WHETHER THEY WOULD
INTRODUCE DEFENDANT'S STATEMENTS AT TRIAL; RIGHT TO COUNSEL -
EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION - WHETHER DEFENSE COUNSEL WAS
INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO OBJECT TO VARIOUS COMMENTS MADE BY
THE PROSECUTOR IN SUMMATION; Supreme Court, Bronx County, convicted
defendant, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree, and sentenced him to a
term of 25 years; App. Div. affirmed.
PULLMAN v SILVERMAN (125 AD3d 562):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 2/26/15; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by App.
Div., 6/30/15; PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS - MALPRACTICE - SUMMARY
JUDGMENT - WHETHER DEFENDANT DOCTOR WAS ENTITLED TO
SUMMARY JUDGMENT DISMISSING COMPLAINT ALLEGING THAT
DOCTOR'S NEGLIGENT ADMINISTRATION OF LIPITOR OR THE
COMBINATION OF LIPITOR AND AZITHROMYCIN CAUSED PLAINTIFF'S
ATRIOVENTRICULAR HEART BLOCK - WHETHER THE COURTS BELOW
CORRECTLY HELD THAT PLAINTIFF FAILED TO SUBMIT EVIDENCE
SUFFICIENT TO RAISE A TRIABLE ISSUE OF FACT THAT HIS EXPERTS'
OPINIONS REGARDING PROXIMATE CAUSATION WERE GENERALLY
ACCEPTED IN THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY - NECESSITY FOR PEER
REVIEWED RESEARCH DIRECTLY ON POINT; Supreme Court, New York County,
dismissed the complaint against defendant Silverman; App. Div. affirmed.
ROMERO (ANTHONY), PEOPLE v (123 AD3d 1147):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 12/31/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by
Lippman, Ch.J., 7/1/15; Rule 500.11 review pending; CRIMES - HARMLESS AND
PREJUDICIAL ERROR - IMPROPER ADMISSION OF STATEMENTS MADE
WITHOUT BENEFIT OF MIRANDA WARNINGS - WHETHER EVIDENCE OF
GUILT WAS OVERWHELMING; IDENTIFICATION OF DEFENDANT - WHETHER
THE HEARING COURT PROPERLY DENIED SUPPRESSION OF SHOW-UP
IDENTIFICATION - WHETHER THE EVIDENCE WAS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT TO
ESTABLISH DEFENDANT'S IDENTITY AS THE PERPETRATOR; Supreme Court,
Queens County, convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of robbery in the first degree
and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and imposed sentence; App. Div.
affirmed.
YOUNG (TERRENCE), PEOPLE v (46 Misc 3d 142[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 50171[U]):
:
App. Term, 2nd Dept., 2nd, 11th and 13th Judicial Districts, order of 2/17/15;
affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Lippman, Ch.J., 6/23/15; CRIMES - RIGHT TO
SPEEDY TRIAL - PEOPLE'S SECOND STATEMENT OF READINESS NOT
ILLUSORY - WHETHER THE PEOPLE'S SUBSEQUENT STATEMENT OF
UNREADINESS RENDERED THEIR SECOND OFF-CALENDAR CERTIFICATE OF
READINESS ILLUSORY; WHETHER THE TRIAL-COURT ERRED IN
CURTAILING DEFENSE COUNSEL'S CROSS-EXAMINATION OF A POLICE
WITNESS; Criminal Court of the City of New York, Kings County, convicted defendant,
after a nonjury trial, of disorderly conduct; App. Term affirmed.
For July 10, 2015 through July 16, 2015, the following preliminary appeal
statements were filed:
BENNETT v ST. JOHN'S HOME (128 AD3d 1428):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 5/8/15; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by App.
Div., 7/2/15; Rule 500.11 review pending; JUDGMENTS - SUMMARY JUDGMENT -
TIMELINESS OF MOTION - WHETHER A TRIAL COURT MUST DENY A
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS UNTIMELY ON THE GROUND THAT
IT WAS MADE MORE THAN 120 DAYS AFTER THE FILING OF THE NOTE OF
ISSUE WITHOUT A SHOWING OF GOOD CAUSE FOR THE DELAY, WHERE THE
PARTIES STIPULATED TO THE TIMING OF THE MOTION BEFORE IT WAS
MADE AND THE TRIAL COURT ACCEPTED THE STIPULATION IN ADVANCE
OF THE MOTION - WHERE PUBLIC POLICY REQUIRES STRICT
ENFORCEMENT OF 120-DAY LIMIT ABSENT LEAVE OF COURT ON GOOD
CAUSE SHOWN; HEALTH - NURSING HOMES - PATIENT NEGLECT -
WHETHER PLAINTIFF RAISED TRIABLE ISSUES OF FACT PRECLUDING
SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON HIS CLAIM BASED ON PUBLIC HEALTH LAW §
2801(d); Supreme Court, Monroe County, granted defendants' motion for summary
judgment dismissing the complaint; App. Div. affirmed.
KANGAS (ROY S.), PEOPLE v:
Oneida County Court order of 2/25/15; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by
Stein, J., 6/25/15; CRIMES - EVIDENCE - BUSINESS RECORDS - ELECTRONIC
RECORDS - WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT IMPROPERLY ADMITTED BREATH
TEST DOCUMENTS INTO EVIDENCE UNDER THE BUSINESS RECORDS
EXCEPTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE; Rome City Court convicted defendant, after a
jury trial, of driving while intoxicated; County Court affirmed.
For July 17, 2015 through July 23, 2015, the following preliminary appeal
statements were filed:
CHERY (LYXON), PEOPLE v (127 AD3d 533):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 4/16/15; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by
Fahey, J., 7/13/15; CRIMES - DEFENDANT AS WITNESS - CROSS-EXAMINATION
OF DEFENDANT - IMPEACHMENT - WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN
ALLOWING THE PEOPLE TO IMPEACH DEFENDANT WITH OMISSIONS FROM
DEFENDANT'S SPONTANEOUS POST-ARREST, PRE-MIRANDA STATEMENT;
Supreme Court, New York County, convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of one count of
robbery in the first degree and two counts of robbery in the second degree and sentenced
him to an aggregate term of five years' incarceration; App. Div. affirmed.
PERKINS (ANTHONY), PEOPLE v (124 AD3d 915):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 1/28/15; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by
Read, J., 7/2/15; CRIMES - IDENTIFICATION OF DEFENDANT - LINEUP -
WHETHER LINEUP IS UNDULY SUGGESTIVE WHERE ONLY ONE LINEUP
SUBJECT HAS A PARTICULAR PHYSICAL FEATURE (DREADLOCKS)
DESCRIBED BY SOME BUT NOT ALL OF THE IDENTIFYING WITNESSES;
FAILURE OF PROSECUTION TO PRESERVE A 911 TAPE RECORDING
CONTAINING POTENTIALLY EXCULPATORY INFORMATION; CLAIMED
FAILURE OF TRIAL JUDGE TO MAKE FACTUAL FINDINGS REGARDING
REASONS PROFFERED FOR A PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE BEFORE
CONCLUDING THAT THE CHALLENGE TO A JUROR WAS NOT RACIALLY
MOTIVATED; Supreme Court, Queens County, convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of
two counts of robbery in the first degree and imposed sentence; App. Div. affirmed.
SHERIDAN v SHERIDAN (129 AD3d 1567):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/19/15; affirmance with dissents; sua sponte
examination whether the order appealed from finally determines the action within the
meaning of the Constitution and whether the two-justice dissent is on a question of law;
PARENT, CHILD AND FAMILY - CUSTODY - WHETHER A SOUND AND SUBSTANTIAL
BASIS EXISTED IN THE RECORD FOR SUPREME COURT'S DETERMINATION
TO AWARD SOLE LEGAL AND PHYSICAL CUSTODY TO MOTHER WITH
VISITATION TO FATHER; Supreme Court, Onondaga County, awarded plaintiff
mother sole legal and physical custody of the parties' child, set a visitation schedule,
allocated attorneys' fees for the attorney for the child, and awarded plaintiff attorneys' fees
against defendant father; App. Div. affirmed.
For July 24, 2015 through July 30, 2015, the following preliminary appeal
statements were filed:
BROWNLEE, MATTER OF v ANNUCCI (130 AD3d 1491):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 7/2/15; confirmation of determination; sua sponte
examination whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support
an appeal as of right; PRISONS AND PRISONERS - DISCIPLINE OF INMATES -
WHETHER SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE SUPPORTS THE DETERMINATION OF
GUILT WITH RESPECT TO VIOLATION OF VARIOUS INMATE RULES; Supreme
Court, Seneca County, transferred the CPLR article 78 proceeding to the App. Div.; App.
Div. confirmed respondents' determination which found, after a Tier III hearing, that
petitioner had violated various inmate rules, and dismissed the petition.
BRUNELLE & HADJIKOW, P.C. v O'CALLAGHAN (126 AD3d 584):
1st Dept. App. Div. orders of 3/19/15 and 6/18/15; sua sponte examination
whether the 6/18/15 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; ACCOUNTS AND ACCOUNTING - ACCOUNT
STATED - LEGAL FEES - SUMMARY JUDGMENT AWARDED TO LAW FIRM IN
ACTION TO RECOVER LEGAL FEES; DENIAL OF MOTION FOR REARGUMENT
OR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE COURT OF APPEALS; Supreme Court, New York
County, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and awarded plaintiff
$157,662.46, plus 9% simple annual interest; App. Div. affirmed and then denied
defendant's motion for reargument or leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.
COUNTY OF CAYUGA, MATTER OF v SHAH (129 AD3d 1503):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/12/15; 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, Cayuga County, in a CPLR article 78
proceeding and declaratory judgment action, among other things, annulled the
respondents-defendants' determination dated 2/10/14 that denied petitioner-plaintiff's
claim for reimbursement of overburden expenses incurred prior to 1/1/06; App. Div.
modified by denying the petition-complaint in its entirety and granting judgment in favor
of respondent-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.
DAVIS v STATE OF NEW YORK (129 AD3d 1353):
3rd Dept. App. Div. order of 6/18/15; affirmance; sua sponte examination whether
a substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right;
STATE - COURT OF CLAIMS - JURISDICTION - WHETHER THE COURT OF
CLAIMS HAD SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OVER ACTION SEEKING
DAMAGES FOR BOARD OF PAROLE'S ALLEGED FAILURE TO PERSONALLY
INTERVIEW CLAIMANT PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE LAW § 259-i(2)(a)(i)
BEFORE MAKING ITS 2013 DECISION DENYING HIM PAROLE, OR WHETHER
SUCH CHALLENGE HAD TO BE BROUGHT IN A CPLR ARTICLE 78
PROCEEDING IN SUPREME COURT; Court of Claims granted defendant's motion to
dismiss the claim and dismissed the claim; App Div. affirmed.
LIN (HAO), PEOPLE v (46 Misc 3d 20):
App. Term, 2nd Dept., 2nd, 11th and 13th Judicial Districts order of 11/26/14;
reversal; leave to appeal granted by Abdus-Salaam, J., 7/2/15; CRIMES - RIGHT OF
CONFRONTATION - WHETHER A POLICE OFFICER WHO OBSERVED THE
ADMINISTRATION OF A BREATHALYZER TEST TO DEFENDANT BY
ANOTHER OFFICER, WHO WAS ALSO QUALIFIED TO ADMINISTER THAT
BREATHALYZER TEST, AND WHO TESTIFIED AT TRIAL BECAUSE THE
TESTING OFFICER WAS UNAVAILABLE, SATISFIED THE STANDARDS FOR
QUALIFYING AS A SUBSTITUTE WITNESS UNDER BULLCOMING v NEW
MEXICO (564 US —, 131 S Ct 2705[2011]); Criminal Court of the City of New York,
Kings County, convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of driving while intoxicated in
violation of Vehicle Traffic Law §§ 1192(2) and (3); App. Term reversed and remitted
the matter to Criminal Court for a new trial.
COUNTY OF MONROE, MATTER OF v SHAH (129 AD3d 1505):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/12/15; 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, Monroe County, in a CPLR article 78
proceeding and declaratory judgment action, among other things, annulled the
respondents-defendants' determinations dated 2/20/14 and 3/6/14 denying petitioner-
plaintiff's reimbursement claims; App. Div. modified by denying the petition-complaint in
its entirety and granting judgment in favor of respondent-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.
REGENCY OAKS CORPORATION v NORMAN-SPENCER McKERNAN, INC. (129 AD3d 1454):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/12/15; affirmance with dissents; sua sponte
examination whether the order appealed from finally determines the action within the
meaning of the Constitution; FRAUD - WHAT CONSTITUTES - ISSUANCE OF
FALSE POLICY - WHETHER PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON LIABILITY
WAS PROPERLY GRANTED TO PLAINTIFF IN FRAUD ACTION ALLEGING
THAT DEFENDANT IS LIABLE FOR THE ACTS OF ITS FORMER EMPLOYEE,
WHO PROVIDED PLAINTIFF WITH A FALSIFIED WORKERS' COMPENSATION
INSURANCE POLICY AND A CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE
PURPORTEDLY ISSUED BY AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP; Supreme
Court, Monroe County, granted plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on
liability; App. Div. affirmed.
STONE (JOHN), PEOPLE v (121 AD3d 617):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 10/30/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by
Lippman, Ch.J., 6/19/15; CRIMES - TRIAL - MISTRIAL - WHETHER MOTION FOR
MISTRIAL WAS PROPERLY DENIED WHERE THE TRIAL COURT STRUCK AND
INSTRUCTED THE JURY TO DISREGARD TESTIMONY BY INVESTIGATING
DETECTIVE THAT, AFTER INTERVIEWING DEFENDANT'S WIFE, A WITNESS
TO THE CRIME WHO DID NOT TESTIFY AT TRIAL, THE DETECTIVE
CONDUCTED SEVERAL COMPUTER CHECKS ON DEFENDANT, "THE PERSON
THAT HAD BEEN INDICATED AS A SUSPECT" - PREJUDICIAL EFFECT OF
TESTIMONY; VERDICT - SETTING VERDICT ASIDE - ALLEGED JURY
MISCONDUCT - WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DENYING MOTION
TO SET ASIDE VERDICT BASED UPON STATEMENTS MADE BETWEEN
COMPLAINANT AND A JUROR WITHOUT HOLDING A HEARING - CPL 330.40
(2) (c-e); Supreme Court, Bronx County, convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of assault
in the first degree, and sentenced him to a term of 22 years; App. Div. affirmed.
WILSON v DANTAS (128 AD3d 176):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 4/14/15; modification; leave to appeal granted by
App. Div., 7/14/15; sua sponte examination whether the appeal has been rendered moot
by plaintiff's June 2015 filing of an amended complaint; COURTS - JURISDICTION -
LONG-ARM JURISDICTION - INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL TRANSACTION -
TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS IN NEW YORK - EXECUTION OF CONTRACTS IN
NEW YORK - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION CORRECTLY HELD THAT
THE COMPLAINT SUFFICIENTLY ALLEGED THAT DEFENDANTS
TRANSACTED BUSINESS IN NEW YORK AND THAT PLAINTIFF'S CAUSES OF
ACTION ARISE FROM DEFENDANTS' NEW YORK CONTACTS - WHETHER THE
APPELLATE DIVISION CORRECTLY REJECTED DEFENDANTS' CONTENTION
THAT THE ACTION SHOULD BE DISMISSED ON THE GROUND OF FORUM
NON CONVENIENS; Supreme Court, New York County, granted the CPLR 3211
motion of defendants Dantas, Opportunity Equity Partners, Ltd., and Opportunity Invest
II, Inc. to dismiss the complaint as against them for lack of personal jurisdiction; App.
Div. modified by denying the motion as to the first, second, fourth and sixth through
eighth causes of action.