APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6227

L/

2003-11110 American & Foreign Insurance Company, respondent, v Axel Protection Systems, appellant, Melito Construction Corporation, defendant. (Index No. 7998/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated October 22, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5579

J/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-04858 Bank One, etc., respondent, v Seretta Cummaro, et al., appellants. (Index No. 2944/00)

DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION

Application by the appellant Seretta Cummaro pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated March 21, 2003.

ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the appeal of James Cummaro is dismissed on the ground that he is not aggrieved by the order appealed from (see CPLR 5511); and it is further,

ORDERED that the application is granted and the time of the appellant Seretta Cummaro to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 16, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

PRUDENTI, P.J., GOLDSTEIN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6204

O/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2002-11494, 2003-05756 Bank of New York, etc., respondent, v Richard J. Castaldo, Jr., et al., appellants. (Index No. 5925/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellants pro se on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated November 19, 2002, and May 29, 2003, respectively, to waive the requirements of 22 NYCRR 670.10(g) regarding certification of the record on appeals.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted.

FLORIO, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5913

M/mv

2003-06957 Joyce Bobinski, appellant, v John Bobinski, respondent. (Index No. 13008/96)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Joyce Bobinski, by permission, from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated August 7, 2003. By scheduling order dated October 22, 2003, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the Clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:

(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Supreme Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or

(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or

(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or

(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or

(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.

The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is

ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated October 22, 2003, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before January 16, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6254

L/

2003-08851 Grace T. Boyajian, respondent, v Scott A. Boyajian, appellant. (Index No. 202532)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered August 20, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6225

O/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2003-04782 Erick Brennan, respondent, v City of New York, defendant, New York City Transit Authority, appellant. (Index No. 30947/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 15, 2003, for leave to reargue the respondent's motion to dismiss the appeal, which was determined by decision and order on motion of this court dated August 6, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SCHMIDT and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6223

L/

2003-10488, 2003-10490 Jean Clevilis, respondent, v Monica M. Bryce, appellant. (Index No. 25524/00)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 21, 2003, and November 17, 2003, respectively.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeals are marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6197

O/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.

2003-06722 County of Nassau, plaintiff, v One 1999 Honda Accord, etc., et al., defendants. (Index No. 10282/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal by the plaintiff from a decision of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 24, 2003.

Now, on the court's own motion, it is

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from a decision (see Schicchi v Green Constr. Corp., 100 AD2d 509).

RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and TOWNES, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6206

O/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

SONDRA MILLER

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2002-04207 Sam Field, etc., respondent, v Rubin Schultz, et al., appellants. (Index No. 21776/93)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellants Gary Schultz and Jeanne Schultz for leave to reargue an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 21, 2002, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated September 22, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs.

PRUDENTI, P.J., S. MILLER, GOLDSTEIN and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6175

M/mv

2003-06041 Albert Goetz-Haddad, appellant, v Steven Worthman, respondent. (Index No. 21284/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 28, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 21, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6237

L/

2003-06853 Steven Greenman, respondent, v Margaret Greenman, appellant. (Index No. 17808/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated July 22, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6213

S/sl

2003-02765, 2003-06968 Lisa Gussack, appellant, v Evan H. Bellin, respondent. (Index No. 10809/94)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated January 29, 2003, and August 5, 2003, respectively.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondent's time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 25, 2004, and the respondent's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6217

S/sl

2003-00615, 2003-04764 Hedaya Home Fashions, Inc., et al., respondents, v American Motorists Insurance Company, etc., et al., appellants. (Index No. 8337/97)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on appeals from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 18, 2002, and April 25, 2003, respectively, and to enlarge the appellants' time to serve and file a reply brief.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the respondents' time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 30, 2004, and the respondents' brief must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellants' reply brief, if any, shall be served and filed on or before February 20, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6255

L/

2003-06004 Alice A. Hine, plaintiff-respondent, v Charles Risk Hine, defendant-respondent; John Berookhim, et al., objectants-appellants. (Index No. 3819/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Withdraw Appeal on Stipulation

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated June 6, 2003.

Upon the stipulation of the parties, dated December 8, 2003, it is

ORDERED that the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6203

S/sl

2003-06077 Household Finance Realty Corporation of New York, respondent, v Leo S. Brown, a/k/a Leon S. Brown, et al., appellants. (Index No. 7956/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated April 24, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 2, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6219

L/

2003-05751 Jay R. Jacobs, plaintiff-respondent, v J. T. Magen Construction Company, defendant third-party plaintiff-respondent; Piermount Iron Works, Inc., third-party defendant-appellant. (Index No. 12702/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 30, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6198

O/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.

2003-05079 Brenda J. Jansen, respondent, v Gerard F. Jansen, appellant. (Index No. 28027/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the former attorney for the appellant for leave to the appellant to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered April 24, 2003, as a poor person. Application by the appellant pro se to withdraw the motion.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the application and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the motion is deemed withdrawn.

RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and TOWNES, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6233

L/

2003-08880 Stacey Losurdo, etc., et al., respondents, v St. Vincent's Medical Center of Richmond, et al., defendants, Francis X. Martingano, etc., et al., appellants. (Index No. 11267/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated August 4, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6208

O/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

WILLIAM F. MASTRO

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2002-07141 Donna Mestric, appellant, v Martinez Cleaning Co., Inc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 1094/00)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated June 27, 2002, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated June 23, 2003, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the decision and order of this court.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs.

PRUDENTI, P.J., SCHMIDT, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6257

L/

2003-03924 Willie Mosley, respondent, v Edgar Flavius, et al., defendants, Walter Murden, appellant. (Index No. 30471/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 12, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6269

L/

2003-05281 Russel Nicholson, et al., respondents- appellants, v Mid-Island Equities Corporation, et al., defendants, Bank of New York, appellant-respondent. (Index No. 20677/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant-respondent to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 25, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6231

L/

2003-08060 North Fork Bank, respondent, v G & H Discount Corporation, defendant, Jennie Caruso, appellant. (Index No.32026/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from a decision of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 17, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6189

S/sl

2003-03669 Aimee L. O'Dell, plaintiff-respondent-appellant, Linda O'Dell, et al., plaintiffs-respondents, v Courtney P. Caswell, et al., defendants-respondents, Charles S. Kelly III, et al., defendants-appellants- respondents. (Index No. 5114/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellants-respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated March 31, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before January 9, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6191

S/sl

2003-06179 Michael Parra, etc., et al., appellants, v Liaqat Ali, et al., respondents. (Index No. 11390/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 23, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 7, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6177

S/sl

2003-06185 Elizabeth Pelaez, etc., appellant, v Westchester Medical Center, etc., et al., respondents. (Index No. 8879/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated May 29, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 1, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6221

O/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

THOMAS A. ADAMS

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.

2002-02218 Delores Perkins, etc., respondent, v Cosmopolitan Care Corporation, et al., appellants, et al., defendants. (Index No. 18199/92)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent for leave to reargue an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 1, 2002, which was determined by decision and order of this court dated September 8, 2003, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the decision and order of this court.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs.

FLORIO, J.P., H. MILLER, ADAMS and MASTRO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5629

E/sl

NANCY E. SMITH, J.P.

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

HOWARD MILLER

SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.

2002-06539 Provident Life and Casualty Insurance Company, respondent, v Scott A. Brittenham, appellant. (Index No. 14344/96)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant to stay the trial in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 13, 2002.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied as academic in light of the determination of the appeal (see Provident Life and Casualty Insurance Company v Brittenham, _____ AD2d _____ [2d Dept, Dec. 29, 2003]).

SMITH, J.P., LUCIANO, H. MILLER and TOWNES, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6224

L/

2003-06115 Charles M. Sellers, appellant, v Cody O. Williams, et al., respondents. (Index No. 8848/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated June 6, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6205

O/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-09688 Babette L. Sommer, appellant, v Astoria Talmud Torah Association, et al., respondents. (Index No. 14427/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent Astoria Center of Israel on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated July 9, 2003, to dismiss the appeal on the ground that it was not timely taken.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

PRUDENTI, P.J., GOLDSTEIN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5973

A/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

NANCY E. SMITH

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-08351, 2003-08352 Surgical Design Corporation, respondent, v Jamir Correa, et al., appellants. (Action No. 1) (Index No. 3479/99) Eliana Correa, appellant, v Surgical Design Corporation, et al., respondents. (Action No. 2) (Index No. 8989/99)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Application by the appellants in both actions to withdraw appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both dated August 14, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeals are marked withdrawn; and it is further,

ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the stay granted by the decision and order on motion of this court dated October 20, 2003, is vacated.

PRUDENTI, P.J., SMITH, FRIEDMANN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6229

L/

2003-08946 Edward Tobin, et al., respondents, v Dennis A. Butler, appellant. (Index No. 2328/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated August 11, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6207

O/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

LEO F. McGINITY

SANDRA L. TOWNES

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2002-07501, 2003-00365 David Vita, et al., respondents, v Alstom Signaling, Inc., appellant. (Index No. 29186/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondents for leave to reargue appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 21, 2002, and December 19, 2002, respectively, which were determined by decision and order of this court dated September 29, 2003, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the decision and order of this court.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs.

RITTER, J.P., McGINITY, TOWNES and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6244

L/

2003-07195 Lidia Vita, appellant, v Enterprise Rent-A-Car, defendant, Maria Elvira Torress Chavez, a/k/a Elvira Torress, et al., respondents. (Index No. 286/99)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated June 18, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6236

L/

2003-07777 Darlene Weglarz, etc., respondent, v Ira B. Pollack, appellant. (Index No. 16767/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 15, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6252

L/

2003-08664 Annie Wood, respondent, v St. Margaret of Antioch Church, et al., appellants. (Index No. 3738/01)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated September 15, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5922

M/mv

2002-10113 In the Matter of Christina B. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., respondents; Connie M. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Megan T. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., respondents; Connie M. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Victoria B. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., respondents; Connie M. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3) (Docket Nos. N-14197-99/01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Connie M. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 5, 2002. Pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order of this court dated December 12, 2003, in the above-entitled proceedings is amended to provide that the appellant shall serve and file her pro se supplemental brief on or before January 15, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the time of the respondent and/or the law guardian to serve and file a brief in the above-entitled appeal is enlarged until February 17, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6216

O/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2002-08985 In the Matter of Hilary Best, appellant- respondent, v Bargold Storage Systems, LLC, respondent-appellant. (Index No. 7385/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant-respondent, inter alia, to recall and vacate a decision and order on motion of this court dated August 8, 2003, which, among other things, dismissed an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated April 18, 2002, to reinstate the appeal, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

PRUDENTI, P.J., ALTMAN, KRAUSMAN and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6250

L/

2003-05758, 2003-06320 In the Matter of Elizabeth C. (Anonymous). New York State Office of Children and Family Services, nonparty-appellant. (Docket No. D-12554-03)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw appeals from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, dated May 21, 2003, and June 12, 2003, respectively.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeals are marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5896

M/mv

2003-01179, 2003-01181, 2003-01182 In the Matter of Salvatore C. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., petitioner-respondents; Salvatore C. (Anonymous), respondent-respondent; Suzy C. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) (Docket No. N-00206-01) In the Matter of Salvatore C. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., petitioner-respondents; Salvatore C. (Anonymous), respondent-respondent; Suzy C. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) (Docket No. N-00206-01) In the Matter of Salvatore C. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., petitioner-respondents; Salvatore C. (Anonymous), respondent-respondent; Suzy C. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3) (Docket No. N-01002-00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by Suzy C. from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated September 13, 2002, and two orders of the same court, both dated January 29, 2003. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on September 9, 2003. The appeal of Salvatore C. was dismissed by decision and order of this court dated December 4, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is

ORDERED that on or before January 20, 2004, the briefs of the respondent(s) and the Law Guardian, if any, in the above-entitled appeals, shall be served and filed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6214

A/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-08128 In the Matter of Vanessa Canty, respondent, v Alphonza Johnson, appellant. (Docket No. F-3516/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal by Alphonza Johnson from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated July 25, 2003. By order to show cause dated December 1, 2003, the parties or their attorneys were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated September 25, 2003, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a).

Now, on the court's own motion, and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation to the order to show cause, it is

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated September 25, 2003 (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]).

RITTER, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5882

M/mv

2002-06236, 2002-06237 In the Matter of Jessica Dee D. (Anonymous), et al. Jewish Child Care Association, et al., petitioners- respondents; Alexandra B. (Anonymous), appellant; Johnny D. (Anonymous), a/k/a John D. (Anonymous), respondent. (Docket Nos. B-16653/00, B-16654/00, B-16655/00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by Alexandra B. from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, dated March 14, 2002, and May 29, 2002, respectively. Pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order of this court dated October 29, 2003, in the above-entitled proceeding is amended to provide that the time of the respondent/the law guardian to serve and file a brief in the above-entitled appeals is enlarged until January 14, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6251

K/cf

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO

NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.

2003-04823 In the Matter of Lisa Michele Daugaard, an attorney and counselor-at-law.

DECISION & ORDER VOLUNTARY RESIGNATION

Lisa Michele Daugaard has voluntarily submitted an affidavit dated May 27, 2003, wherein she, an attorney in good standing, resigns from the New York State Bar. Ms. Daugaard was admitted to the Bar in the State of New York at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on November 29, 1995. She is presently an attorney in good standing in the State of New York and there are no complaints or charges of professional misconduct pending against her. Ms. Daugaard presently resides in the State of Washington where she is employed as a public interest lawyer. She has not practiced law in New York since 1996, and, under these circumstances, feels it is too costly to pay registration fees in two states.

Upon the papers submitted in support of the resignation, it is

ORDERED that the voluntary resignation of Lisa Michele Daugaard, an attorney in good standing, is accepted and directed to be filed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the name of Lisa Michele Daugaard is removed from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, without prejudice to an application for reinstatement; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately, Lisa Michele Daugaard, is commanded to desist and refrain from (l) practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk, or employee of another in the State of New York, (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority in this State, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto in this State, and (4) holding herself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York.

PRUDENTI, P.J., SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6228

C/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-08341 In the Matter of Frank DePalma, appellant, v Andrea DePalma, respondent. (Docket No. V-08749/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal by Frank DePalma from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated August 22, 2003. By order to show cause dated December 12, 2003, the parties or their attorneys were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above entitled proceeding for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated October 30, 2003, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a). Application by the appellant to withdraw the appeal.

Now, on the court's own motion and upon the papers filed in support of the application, and no other papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order to show cause is denied as academic.

RITTER, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5886

M/mv

2003-04019 In the Matter of Anna Diggs, respondent, v Arnold Diggs, appellant. (Docket No. F-3077-88)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Arnold Diggs from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated January 21, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order of this court dated September 23, 2003, in the above-entitled proceeding is amended to provide that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal by causing the original papers constituting the record on the appeal to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing the brief on the appeal is enlarged until January 30, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6196

K/cf

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

1999-00115 In the Matter of Alvin Dorfman, a disbarred attorney. Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, petitioner; Alvin Dorfman, respondent.

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent for an order granting reconsideration of the opinion and order of this court dated February 28, 2000, which disbarred him as a result of a disciplinary proceeding involving one charge of professional misconduct emanating from his conviction of a serious crime, and, upon reconsideration, reducing the sanction imposed to the time that he has already been out of practice, and reinstating him to the practice of law. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on June 18, 1958.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in response thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN and FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5921

M/mv

2003-04061, 2003-04062 2003-04063, 2003-04064 In the Matter of Antonette Alasha E. (Anonymous). Concord Family Services, Inc., respondent; Chrisella E. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) (Docket No. B-6460-02) In the Matter of Anthony Lawrence E. (Anonymous). Concord Family Services, Inc., respondent; Chrisella E. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) (Docket No. B-6461-02) In the Matter of "Baby Boy" E. (Anonymous). Concord Family Services, Inc., respondent; Chrisella E. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3) (Docket No. B-6462-02) In the Matter of Zaire Cozine E. (Anonymous). Concord Family Services, Inc., respondent; Chrisella E. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 4) (Docket No. B-6463-02)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by Chrisella E. from four orders of the Family Court, Kings County, all dated March 17, 2003. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on November 26, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is

ORDERED that on or before January 20, 2004, the briefs of the respondent(s) and the Law Guardian, if any, in the above-entitled appeals, shall be served and filed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5916

M/mv

2003-08486 In the Matter of William J. Ekert, respondent, v Mary L. Ekert, appellant. (Docket No. O-09057/03)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Mary L. Ekert from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated August 14, 2003. By scheduling order dated October 22, 2003, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the Clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:

(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or

(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or

(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or

(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or

(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.

The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is

ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated October 22, 2003, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before January 16, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5531

M/mv

2002-03726 In the Matter of Elisa F. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent; Otis H. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. N-10492/98A)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Otis H. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated March 20, 2002. Pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order of this court dated September 24, 2003, in the above-entitled proceeding is amended to provide that the time of the respondent and/or the law guardian to serve and file their respective briefs in the above-entitled appeal is enlarged until January 15, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5917

M/mv

2003-09002 In the Matter of David E. Foster, respondent, v Arkadius Henry, appellant. (Docket No. O-6649-03)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Arkadius Henry from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated September 3, 2003. By scheduling order dated October 30, 2003, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the Clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:

(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or

(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or

(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or

(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or

(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.

The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is

ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated October 30, 2003, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before January 16, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6215

C/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-06093 In the Matter of Deborah Fugazy, respondent, v William Fugazy, etc., appellant. (Docket No. O-6850-03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal by William Fugazy from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated June 4, 2003. By order to show cause dated December 1, 2003, the parties or their attorneys were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated August 12, 2003, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a).

Now, on the court's own motion, and the papers filed in relation to the order to show cause, it is

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated August 12, 2003 (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]).

RITTER, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6188

A/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-09884 In the Matter of Richard Giliotti, appellant, v Carol Schiff, etc., respondent. (Index No. 7779/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion To Dismiss Appeal

Motion by the respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered September 12, 2003, on the ground that it was not timely taken.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

PRUDENTI, P.J., GOLDSTEIN, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5881

M/mv

2002-09099 In the Matter of Jeffrey Green, respondent, v Tyhese Gordon, appellant. (Docket Nos. V-22856-98, V-02172/01)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Tyhese Gordon from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated December 2, 2002. The appellant's brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on October 3, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(2) of the Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is

ORDERED that the briefs of the respondent(s) and the Law Guardian, if any, in the above-entitled appeal, shall be served and filed on or before January 15, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6220

A/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-09000, 2003-09001 In the Matter of Arkadius Henry, appellant, v David E. Foster, respondent. (Docket No. O-6812/03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeals by Arkadius Henry from two orders of the Family Court, Nassau County, both dated September 3, 2003. By order to show cause dated December 12, 2003, the parties or their attorneys were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeals in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated October 30, 2003, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a).

Now, on the court's own motion, and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation to the order to show cause, it is

ORDERED that the appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated October 30, 2003 (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]).

RITTER, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5867

M/mv

2003-04554 In the Matter of Luz Ingravera, respondent, v Marvin Goss, appellant. (Docket No. P-6843-00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Marvin Goss from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated December 23, 2002. By decision and order on motion of this court dated December 10, 2003, the appellant's motion to dispense with printing and for assignment of counsel was granted, and the following named attorney was assigned to prosecute the appeal:

Jeffrey Bluth, Esq.

415 Albermarle Road

Brooklyn, N.Y. 11218

(718) 435-5357

Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is

ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected either within 60 days after the receipt by the assigned counsel of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the assigned counsel shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,

ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the assigned counsel shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:

(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of any Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or

(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or

(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that the order of this court dated December 10, 2003, has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken, the date thereof, and the date by which the transcript is expected; or

(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,

ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6195

K/cf

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

2003-09315 In the Matter of Arnold J. Kaplan, an attorney and counselor-at-law. Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, petitioner; Arnold J. Kaplan, respondent.

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District for an order: (1) suspending the respondent from the practice of law pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.4(l)(1)(i), based upon a finding that he is guilty of professional misconduct immediately threatening the public interest in that he has obstructed the legitimate function of the Grievance Committee in its investigation of a complaint against him; and (2) directing the respondent to appear at the Grievance Committee's offices, within 10 days after service of the court's decision and order on motion, to give testimony regarding the pending complaint and to bring with him any and all documents and files pertaining to that complaint. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on June 1, 1983, under the name Arnold Jeffrey Kaplan.

Upon the papers submitted in support of the motion and no papers having been submitted in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.4(l)(1)(i), the respondent, Arnold J. Kaplan, is immediately suspended from the practice of law in the State of New York, pending further order of this court; and it is further,

ORDERED that Arnold J. Kaplan shall promptly comply with this court's rules governing the conduct of disbarred, suspended, and resigned attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 691.10); and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, during the period of suspension and until further order of this court, the respondent, Arnold J. Kaplan, is commanded to desist and refrain from (1) practicing law in any form, either as principal or agent, clerk, or employee of another, (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4) holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law; and it is further,

ORDERED that within 10 days after service upon him of a copy of this decision and order on motion, the respondent shall appear at the Grievance Committee's offices to give testimony regarding all pending complaints, and shall bring with him at that time any and all pertinent documents and files; and it is further,

ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District is hereby authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding in this court, as petitioner, against Arnold J. Kaplan, based upon the Grievance Committee's affirmation dated August 23, 2003; and it is further,

ORDERED that Robert P. Guido, Chief Counsel to the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, North Shore Atrium II, 6900 Jericho Turnpike, Suite 102LL, Syosset, N.Y. 11791, is hereby appointed as attorney for the petitioner in that proceeding; and it is further,

ORDERED that within 30 days after its receipt of this decision and order on motion, the petitioner shall serve a petition upon the respondent and the Special Referee and shall file a copy of the same in the office of the Clerk of this court; and it is further,

ORDERED that within 10 days after service upon him of the petition, the respondent shall serve an answer upon the petitioner and the Special Referee and shall file a copy of the same in the office of the Clerk of this court; and it is further,

ORDERED that the issues raised by the petition and any answer thereto are referred to Peter T. Affatato, Esq., Briarcliffe Building, 1055 Stewart Avenue, Bethpage, N.Y. 11714, as Special Referee to hear and report, together with his findings on the issues.

We find, prima facie, that the respondent is guilty of professional misconduct immediately threatening the public interest based upon his failure to cooperate with the Grievance Committee's investigation.

Although respondent admitted personal service of the Grievance Committee's motion papers upon him, he has not submitted a timely response nor requested additional time in which to reply.

The Grievance Committee's motion is predicated upon the respondent's contumacious and deliberate failure to respond to its repeated requests to submit a written response to the complaint, coupled with respondent's failure to obey a so-ordered subpoena of the court commanding him to appear at the Grievance Committee's offices to be examined under oath, and his disciplinary history for similar misconduct.

In June 2001, the Grievance Committee received an undated complaint from Katherine Opderbeck emanating from her late husband's retainer of respondent in 1994 to represent him in a personal injury matter. In 1998, Mr. Opderbeck passed away and the complainant was appointed to proceed with the matter on his behalf. Although the respondent assured the complainant between 1998 and June 2001 that the matter was still pending, she later learned that the case had been dismissed in 1995. The respondent advised the complainant that he was no longer representing her.

By letter dated June 26, 2001, the Grievance Committee notified the respondent of the complaint and requested his written response within 15 days. Although the respondent received three extensions of time in which to submit his answer between July 2001 and October 8, 2001, no answer was received. From October 2001 through November 18, 2001, the respondent advised that he would be forwarding his response along with a letter in mitigation of his failure to cooperate. On December 4, 2001, the respondent received a two week extension of time to reply. Still, no written response was received.

By letter dated January 23, 2002, sent via certified mail, Grievance Counsel advised the respondent that it had still not received a response to the Opderbeck complaint and reminded him that his failure to cooperate constitutes professional misconduct independent of the merits of the underlying complaint. The Grievance Committee requested his response within 10 days. Although the respondent signed for the letter, no reply was received.

On or about February 12, 2002, the respondent telephoned Grievance Counsel advising of personal and professional problems he was experiencing and of his desire to resolve this matter. The respondent requested a second copy of the complaint with the understanding that he would contact Grievance Counsel by February 14, 2002. The respondent failed to reply to a follow-up from Grievance Counsel dated February 19, 2002.

By letter dated March 8, 2002, sent via certified mail, Grievance Counsel reminded the respondent that failure to cooperate constitutes professional misconduct independent of the underlying merits and directed him to contact her in order to discuss this matter.

By subsequent letter, which was hand-delivered to respondent on April 11, 2002, Grievance Counsel directed the respondent to contact her within five days. On or about April 12, 2002, the respondent telephoned Grievance Counsel and requested a third copy of the complaint. When the respondent informed Grievance Counsel that he had not received the third copy, a fourth copy of the complaint was mailed to the respondent on April 25, 2002. On May 10, 2002 the respondent alleged that he had not received the fourth copy and advised that he would contact the Grievance Committee by May 12, 2002. Grievance Counsel unsuccessfully attempted to contact respondent through his paging service between May 15 and June 5, 2002. On or about June 10, 2002, the Grievance Committee hand-delivered another copy of the complaint to the respondent and requested his answer within 10 days.

By letter dated July 24, 2002, sent via fax and regular mail, Grievance Counsel confirmed a conference scheduled for July 29, 2002. The respondent did not appear on that date but telephoned Grievance Counsel claiming automobile problems. The respondent appeared at the Grievance Committee's office on July 31, 2002 and indicated that he planned to contact the Lawyers' Assistance Program to deal with his problems. He represented that he would advise the Grievance Committee of what transpired. The respondent also assured Grievance Counsel that he would provide an answer shortly. The Lawyers' Assistance Program advised the Grievance Committee that they were working with the respondent to resolve his problems.

By letter dated November 6, 2002 sent to the respondent's office address, Grievance Counsel advised the respondent of her unsuccessful attempts to reach him and requested that he contact her in order to discuss this matter. Through December 24, 2002, the respondent advised the Grievance Committee that he was consulting with the Lawyers' Assistance Program and would apprise it of his status.

Between January 29, 2002, and June 27, 2003, Grievance Counsel was advised of the respondent's attempts to work with the Lawyers' Assistance Program and his attempts to retain counsel to represent him in both the underlying matter and the pending complaint. By letter dated July 11, 2003, Grievance Counsel was advised that the respondent was not represented by counsel.

By letter dated July 23, 2003, sent via both regular and certified mail, the Grievance Committee demanded both a written answer and an explanation of his failure to timely cooperate. No response was received.

On August 19, 2003, the Grievance Committee personally served the respondent with a judicial subpoena and a subpoena duces tecum requiring his appearance to testify and to produce files with respect to this matter. The respondent failed to appear or produce the requested materials.

The respondent received a Letter of Admonition, dated September 22, 2000, for failing to cooperate with the Grievance Committee, making false and misleading statements to the Grievance Committee regarding his registration status and payments to OCA, and failing to properly register.

Although the respondent admitted personal service of the Grievance Committee's motion papers upon him, he has not submitted a timely reply nor requested additional time in which to reply.

Under the circumstances, the respondent is found to constitute an immediate threat to the public interest and the motion to suspend him is granted, without opposition. The respondent

is directed to appear at the Grievance Committee's offices within 10 days with all pertinent documents and files and to give testimony regarding the pending complaint and the Grievance Committee is authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding against the respondent.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN and FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6202

S/sl

2003-03866 In the Matter of Matthew A. Kaufman, et al., appellants, v Allstate Insurance Company, respondent. (Index No. 47951/02)

ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 24, 2003.

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appellants' time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 28, 2004, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants' brief must be served and filed on or before that date.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5908

M/mv

2003-08535 In the Matter of Riva Lava, respondent, v Andreas Damianou, appellant. (Docket No. P-3894/01)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Andreas Damianou from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated August 18, 2003. By scheduling order dated October 23, 2003, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the Clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:

(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or

(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or

(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or

(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or

(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.

The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is

ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated October 23, 2003, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before January 16, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6242

L/

2003-09546 In the Matter of Karen Leggio, respondent, v Thomas Leggio, appellant. (Docket No. F-121-95-03G)

ORDER ON APPLICATION Application to Withdraw Appeal

Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated September 16, 2003.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6212

E/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-07782 In the Matter of Clifford R. Medney, appellant- respondent, v Tania Medney, respondent-appellant. (Docket No. F-00170/00)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated August 6, 2003. By order to show cause dated November 25, 2003, the parties or their attorneys were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal and cross appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated September 29, 2003, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a). Application by the cross appellant to withdraw the cross appeal.

Now, on the court's own motion and upon the papers filed in support of the application, and no other papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted and the cross appeal is marked withdrawn; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the order to show cause which is to dismiss the appeal is granted and the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated September 29, 2003; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order to show cause is otherwise denied as academic.

RITTER, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5907

M/mv

2003-02078 In the Matter of Valerie Meekins, respondent, v Maurice Dudley, appellant. (Docket No. F-884-00)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Maurice Dudley from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated February 5, 2003. By scheduling order dated October 28, 2003, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the Clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:

(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or

(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or

(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or

(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or

(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.

The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is

ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated October 28, 2003, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before January 16, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6246

K/cf

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO

NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.

2003-03967 In the Matter of Myra S. Mitzman, an attorney and counselor-at-law.

DECISION & ORDER VOLUNTARY RESIGNATION

Myra S. Mitzman has voluntarily submitted an affidavit dated April 24, 2003, wherein she, an attorney in good standing, resigns from the New York State Bar. Ms. Mitzman was admitted to the Bar in the State of New York at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on January 13, 1988. She is presently an attorney in good standing in the State of New York and there are no complaints or charges of professional misconduct pending against her. Ms. Mitzman presently resides in California, has not practiced law in New York since 1989, and, under these circumstances, does not wish to pay the biennial registration fee.

Upon the papers submitted in support of the resignation, it is

ORDERED that the voluntary resignation of Myra S. Mitzman, an attorney in good standing, is accepted and directed to be filed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the name of Myra S. Mitzman is removed from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, without prejudice to an application for reinstatement; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately, Myra S. Mitzman is commanded to desist and refrain from (l) practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk, or employee of another in the State of New York, (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority in this State, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto in this State, and (4) holding herself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York.

PRUDENTI, P.J., SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5870

M/mv

2003-08411, 2003-08412 In the Matter of Arial Ana O. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Milagros O. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Docket No. B-15842/00) In the Matter of Cristal Lee O. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Milagros O. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Docket No. B-15841/00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeals by Milagros O. from two orders of the Family Court, Queens County, both dated September 5, 2003. By decision and order on motion of this court dated December 10, 2003, the appellant's motion to dispense with printing and for assignment of counsel was granted, and the following named attorney was assigned to prosecute the appeals:

Lewis S. Calderon, Esq.

90-50 Parsons Blvd. No. 401

Jamaica, New York 11432

(718) 868-8456

Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is

ORDERED that the appeals in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected either within 60 days after the receipt by the assigned counsel of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the assigned counsel shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,

ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the assigned counsel shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:

(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes of any Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeals; or

(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or

(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that the order of this court dated December 10, 2003, has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeals are taken, the date thereof, and the date by which the transcript is expected; or

(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeals; and it is further,

ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeals to show cause why the appeals should not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Mr. Rose. Please contact him at 718-722-6487 with any questions.

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5878

M/mv

2003-07136 In the Matter of Carlos P. (Anonymous), appellant. (Docket No. D-3242-03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by the juvenile from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated August 13, 2003. By decision and order on motion of this court dated December 10, 2003, the following named attorney was assigned to represent the appellant on the appeal:

John A. Pappalardo, Esq.

200 East Post Road

White Plains, New York 10007

(914) 761-9400

Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is

ORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the appellant shall notify this court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, in cases where there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this scheduling order; and it is further,

ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this scheduling order, the appellant shall file in the office of the Clerk of this court one of the following:

(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there are no minutes in the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or

(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date that it was received; or

(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it has been ordered, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or

(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,

ORDERED that if none of the above actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above, has been taken within 30 days of the date of this scheduling order, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6232

K/cf

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO

NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.

2003-04821 In the Matter of Ellery Eliot Plotkin, an attorney and counselor-at-law.

DECISION & ORDER VOLUNTARY RESIGNATION

Ellery Eliot Plotkin voluntarily submitted an affidavit dated May 27, 2003, wherein he, an attorney in good standing, resigns from the New York State Bar. Mr. Plotkin was admitted to the Bar in the State of New York at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on May 24, 1978. He is presently an attorney in good standing in the State of New York and there are no complaints or charges of professional misconduct pending against him. Mr. Plotkin presently resides in Connecticut where he maintains a successful law practice. His schedule does not permit him to practice law in New York and, therefore, under these circumstances, he does not wish to continue to pay the biennial registration fee.

Upon the papers submitted in support of the resignation, it is

ORDERED that the voluntary resignation of Ellery Eliot Plotkin, an attorney in good standing, is accepted and directed to be filed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the name of Ellery Eliot Plotkin is removed from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, without prejudice to an application for reinstatement; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately, Ellery Eliot Plotkin, is commanded to desist and refrain from (l) practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk, or employee of another in the State of New York, (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority in this State, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto in this State, and (4) holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York.

PRUDENTI, P.J., SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5893

M/mv

2001-08955 In the Matter of Natalie Pope, appellant, v Jonas Pope, respondent. (Docket No. 7543/00)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Natalie Pope from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated September 19, 2001. The original papers were filed in the office of the Clerk of this court on October 28, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(a) of the Rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it is

ORDERED that on or before January 30, 2004, counsel for the appellant shall perfect the appeal or submit an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to provide copies of the transcripts to all of the other parties to the appeal, including the Law Guardian, if any, when counsel serves the appellant's brief upon those parties; and it is further,

ORDERED that if the appeal has not been perfected or withdrawn on or before January 30, 2004, the Clerk of the court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal shall not be dismissed.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

The Case Manager assigned to this case is Ms. Vazquez. Please contact her at 718-722-6488 with any questions.

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6176

E/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.

2003-07821, 2003-10992 In the Matter of Isabella Principato, et al., respondents, v Louis Lombardi, appellant. (Index No. 33504/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 24, 2003, and November 20, 2003, respectively, to stay enforcement of the orders pending hearing and determination of the appeals therefrom.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

RITTER, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5900

M/mv

2002-04839 In the Matter of Donovan R. (Anonymous). Angel Guardian Children and Family Services, Inc., appellant; Affette R. (Anonymous), respondent. (Docket No. B-25269/98)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by the petitioner from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated April 4, 2002. Pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order of this court dated October 28, 2003, in the above-entitled proceeding is amended to provide that the time of the respondent and/or the law guardian to serve and file a brief in the above-entitled appeal is enlarged until January 20, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6222

K/cf

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

1995-03789 In the Matter of Nora Z. Ramos, a suspended attorney.

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION FOR REINSTATEMENT

Motion by the respondent, Nora Z. Ramos, for reinstatement as an attorney and counselor-at-law and for an exemption from the payment of the attorney's biennial registration fee for the years 1996 to 2003. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on February 15, 1968. By opinion and order of this court dated February 20, 1996, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law for a period of five years based on two charges of professional misconduct. By decision and order on application of this court dated February 19, 2002, the respondent's previous application for reinstatement was denied.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in response thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN and FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5918

M/mv

2002-00966 In the Matter of Orlando Rodriguez, respondent, v Elia Irizarry, appellant. (Queens County Docket No. V-2263-01) (Kings County Docket Nos. V-12542-96, V-12543-96)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Elia Irizarry from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated January 2, 2002. Pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order of this court dated August 20, 2003, in the above-entitled proceeding is amended to provide that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal by causing the original papers constituting the record on the appeal to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing the brief on the appeal is enlarged until February 13, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6256

K/cf

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO

NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.

2003-04736 In the Matter of Lawrence Schorr, an attorney and counselor-at-law.

DECISION & ORDER VOLUNTARY RESIGNATION

Lawrence Schorr voluntarily submitted an affidavit dated May 21, 2003, wherein he, an attorney in good standing, resigns from the New York State Bar. Mr. Schorr was admitted to the Bar in the State of New York at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on October 16, 1957. He is presently an attorney in good standing in the State of New York and there are no complaints or charges of professional misconduct pending against him. Mr. Schorr currently resides in California, does not practice law in New York and, stating his age as a factor, has no intention of practicing law here in the future. Under these circumstances, he does not wish to pay the biennial registration fee.

Upon the papers submitted in support of the resignation, it is

ORDERED that the voluntary resignation of Lawrence Schorr, an attorney in good standing, is accepted and directed to be filed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the name of Lawrence Schorr is removed from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, without prejudice to an application for reinstatement; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately, Lawrence Schorr, is commanded to desist and refrain from (l) practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk, or employee of another in the State of New York, (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority in

this State, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto in this State, and (4) holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York.

PRUDENTI, P.J., SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5923

M/mv

2003-08295 In the Matter of Larissa Schubert, respondent, v Gregory W. Schubert, appellant. (Docket No. O-3454-03)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeal by Gregory W. Schubert from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated August 6, 2003. By scheduling order dated October 22, 2003, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the Clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:

(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or

(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or

(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or

(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeal, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or

(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.

The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is

ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated October 22, 2003, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before January 16, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6194

K/cf

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO

HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

2003-09458 In the Matter of Neal M. Sher, an attorney and counselor-at-law. Grievance Committee for the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts, petitioner; Neal M. Sher, respondent.

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the petitioner, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.3, to impose discipline on the respondent based upon disciplinary action taken against him in the District of Columbia. The respondent was admitted to the Bar in the State of New York, at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on April 25, 1973.

By order of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals dated August 28, 2003, the respondent was disbarred on consent in that jurisdiction. The respondent's misconduct involved his submission of false claims for reimbursement to the International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims.

The Grievance Committee served the respondent with a notice pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.3(d), informing him of his right to impose certain enumerated defenses to the imposition of discipline in New York. In his reply dated November 28, 2003, the respondent maintained, inter alia, that the imposition of reciprocal discipline by this court would be unjust.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers submitted in response thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is held in abeyance pending a hearing, upon the respondent's request, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.3(d); and it is further,

ORDERED that a hearing shall be conducted before the Honorable John A. Monteleone, a retired Justice of the Supreme Court, 16 Court Street, 18th Floor, Brooklyn, N.Y. 11241, as Special Referee to hear and report on the findings of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and the respondent's arguments as to why the imposition of discipline by this court would be unjust.

RITTER, J.P., SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5880

M/mv

2003-07165 In the Matter of Reuben Vabner, appellant, v Veronique Pozner, respondent. (Docket Nos. V-6988-03, V-6989-03)

SCHEDULING ORDER

Appeal by Reuben Vabner from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated July 9, 2003. Pursuant to § 670.4(d)(3) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[d][3]), it is

ORDERED that the scheduling order of this court dated September 5, 2003, in the above-entitled proceeding is amended to provide that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal by causing the original papers constituting the record on the appeal to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing the brief on the appeal is enlarged until January 15, 2004.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5883

M/mv

2003-08488, 2003-08489 In the Matter of Arletha Walker, appellant, v Eric Walker, respondent. (Docket Nos. V-981-97/02, V-2975-97/02)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Appeals by Arletha Walker from two orders of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated August 8, 2003, and August 22, 2003, respectively. By scheduling order dated October 22, 2003, the appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the Clerk of the court, within 30 days after the date of the scheduling order:

(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeals; or

(2) if there were such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that the transcript was received, and indicating the date that it was received; or

(3) if the transcript was not received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that it was ordered and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; or

(4) if the appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the appeals, a motion in this court for leave to prosecute the appeals as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel, pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 1101; or

(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeals.

The appellant has failed to comply with the scheduling order. Pursuant to § 670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it is

ORDERED that the parties or their attorneys are directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeals in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with the scheduling order dated October 22, 2003, by each filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court and serving one copy of the same on each other on or before January 16, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order upon the parties or their attorneys.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6218

E/sl

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-09090 In the Matter of Yelena Yaroshenko, respondent, v Edvard Kats, etc., appellant. (Docket No. F-8596/98)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal by Edvard Kats from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 24, 2003. By order to show cause dated December 12, 2003, the parties or their attorneys were directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding for failure to comply with a scheduling order dated October 30, 2003, issued pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.4(a).

Now, on the court's own motion, and the papers filed in response to the order to show cause, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to section 670.4(a) of the rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), the scheduling order dated October 30, 2003, is amended to provide that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal by causing the original papers constituting the record on the appeal to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing the brief on the appeal is enlarged until March 1, 2004.

RITTER, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6209

O/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

1997-10915, 1997-10916 The People, etc., respondent, v Chad Breland, appellant. (Ind No. 5313/95, 5566/95)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to serve and file a supplemental reply brief on appeals from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both rendered October 20, 1997.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

FLORIO, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6034

F/

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

2003-09343 The People, etc., respondent, v Troy Brinkhuis, appellant. (Ind. No. 1254-03)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Poor Person Relief and to Assign Counsel Appeal from Judgment

Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered October 7, 2003, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,

ORDERED that the stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify, and file two transcripts of the proceedings of any pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; and it is further,

ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned counsel with a copy of the presentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the court and the District Attorney's office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:

Robert C. Mitchell, Esq.

Legal Aid Society of Suffolk Co., - Appeals Bureau

Post Office Box 1697

Riverhead, New York 11901-3398

and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his representative access to the record for the purpose of preparing the appeal; such access shall include permission to copy the papers insofar as they pertain to the appellant; and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

Appellant's address:

03 R 5358

Ulster Corr. Fac.

Box 800

Napanoch, N.Y. 12458

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6030

F/

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

2003-08689 The People, etc., respondent, v Vincent Bulerin, appellant. (Ind. No. 2301-98)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Poor Person Relief and to Assign Counsel Appeal from Judgment

Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County, dated September 10, 2003, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,

ORDERED that the stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify, and file two transcripts of the proceedings of any pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; and it is further,

ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned counsel with a copy of the presentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the court and the District Attorney's office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:

Robert C. Mitchell, Esq.

Legal Aid Society of Suffolk Co., - Appeals Bureau

Post Office Box 1697

Riverhead, New York 11901-3398

and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his representative access to the record for the purpose of preparing the appeal; such access shall include permission to copy the papers insofar as they pertain to the appellant; and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

Appellant's address:

99 A 3291

Marcy Corr. Fac.

Box 500

Marcy, N.Y. 13403

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6200

O/slDAVID S. RITTER, J.P.

SONDRA MILLER

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.

2002-06973 The People, etc., respondent, v Ronald Catti, appellant. (Ind. No. 1062/01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered June 12, 2002, as a poor person, for the assignment of counsel, and to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal by causing the original papers constituting the record on the appeal to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing his brief on the appeal is enlarged until May 3, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for the assignment of counsel is denied, with leave to renew upon proper papers, including the appellant's affidavit setting forth the amount and source of counsel fees paid to retained counsel, and if on bail before conviction, the amount and source of the bail money, and if bail was the appellant's own money, what happened to the same after conviction.

RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and TOWNES, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6032

F/

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

2003-08686 The People, etc., respondent, v Robert Dean, appellant. (Ind. No. 2577-01)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Poor Person Relief and to Assign Counsel Appeal from Judgment

Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered September 25, 2003, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,

ORDERED that the stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify, and file two transcripts of the proceedings of any pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; and it is further,

ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned counsel with a copy of the presentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the court and the District Attorney's office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:

Robert C. Mitchell, Esq.

Legal Aid Society of Suffolk Co., - Appeals Bureau

Post Office Box 1697

Riverhead, New York 11901-3398

and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his representative access to the record for the purpose of preparing the appeal; such access shall include permission to copy the papers insofar as they pertain to the appellant; and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

Appellant's address:

03 A 5273

Downstate Corr. Fac.

Box F

Fishkill, N.Y. 12524

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5988

F/

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-03307 The People, etc., respondent, v Eliezer Diaz, appellant. (Ind. No. 2317/02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion to Dispense With Printing Free Minutes

Motion by the appellant for leave to dispense with printing on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered April 4, 2003, and for a copy of the typewritten transcripts of the stenographic minutes, without charge.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to dispense with printing is denied as unnecessary (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][1][viii]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the motion is otherwise granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,

ORDERED that the stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify and file two transcripts of the proceedings, if any, of any pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); retained counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the Trial Court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for retained counsel; and it is further,

ORDERED that, upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide counsel with a copy of the pre-sentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the court and the District Attorney's office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,

ORDERED that retained counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged.

PRUDENTI, P.J., GOLDSTEIN, LUCIANO, and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

Attorney's Address:

Martin Goldberg, Esq.

50 Court Street - Suite 702

Brooklyn, New York 11201

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6033

F/

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

2003-09344 The People, etc., respondent, v Vladimyr Eugene, appellant. (Ind. No. 2005-02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Poor Person Relief and to Assign Counsel Appeal from Judgment

Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered October 14, 2003, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,

ORDERED that the stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify, and file two transcripts of the proceedings of any pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; and it is further,

ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned counsel with a copy of the presentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the court and the District Attorney's office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:

Robert C. Mitchell, Esq.

Legal Aid Society of Suffolk Co., - Appeals Bureau

Post Office Box 1697

Riverhead, New York 11901-3398

and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his representative access to the record for the purpose of preparing the appeal; such access shall include permission to copy the papers insofar as they pertain to the appellant; and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

Appellant's address:

Downstate Corr. Fac.

Box 445

Fishkill, N.Y. 12524

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6211

O/sl

ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.

2001-02821 The People, etc., respondent, v Harold Gooding, appellant. (Ind. No. 1706/00)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for an Enlargement of Time to File a Supplemental Brief

Motion by the appellant pro se for an enlargement of time to serve and file a supplemental brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered March 15, 2001.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted, and the appellant's supplemental pro se brief shall be served and filed on or before February 13, 2004; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant shall file nine copies of the supplemental brief and serve one copy on the District Attorney.

FLORIO, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6183

A/sl

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P.

HOWARD MILLER

THOMAS A. ADAMS

SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.

2002-07565, 2002-07567 The People, etc., respondent, v Clarence C. Jones, appellant. (Ind. No. 48178)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the appellant on appeals from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered November 27, 1979, and an amended judgment of the same court, rendered April 11, 1980, inter alia, to be provided with any and all minutes of the Grand Jury proceedings in connection with Indictment No. 48178.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied with leave to renew upon proper papers including the name of the police officer referred to in paragraph 2 of the appellant's motion papers.

ALTMAN, J.P., H. MILLER, ADAMS and TOWNES, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5888

F/

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

1999-06205, 1999-06206 DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION The People, etc., respondent, v Donovan Malcolm, appellant. (Ind. Nos. 98-00500, 99-00022)

On the court's own motion, it is

ORDERED that the decision and order on motion of this court, dated July 26, 2002, which granted the appellant's motion for leave to serve and file a supplemental pro se brief on appeals from two judgments of the County Court, Orange County, both rendered June 8, 1999, is recalled and vacated; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's motion for leave to file a supplemental pro se brief is denied.

The appellant has failed to file a supplemental pro se brief although afforded sufficient opportunity to do so.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN and FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6050

F/

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

2003-09171 The People, etc., respondent, v Aneudi Morel, appellant. (Ind. No. 02-00996)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Poor Person Relief and to Assign Counsel Appeal from Judgment

Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, rendered September 5, 2003, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,

ORDERED that the stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify, and file two transcripts of the proceedings of any pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; and it is further,

ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned counsel with a copy of the presentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the court and the District Attorney's office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:

Matthew Spencer, Esq.

151 Broadway

Hawthorne, New York 10532

and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his representative access to the record for the purpose of preparing the appeal; such access shall include permission to copy the papers insofar as they pertain to the appellant; and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

Appellant's address:

03 A 5083

Downstate Corr. Fac.

Box F

Fishkilk, New York 12524

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5838

F/

NANCY E. SMITH, J.

2003-08343 The People, etc., plaintiff, v Eddie Parker, defendant. (Ind. No. 95541)

DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION

Application by the defendant, pursuant to CPL 450.15 and 460.15 for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this court from an order of the County Court, Nassau County, dated July 28, 2003, which has been referred to me for determination.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is denied.

NANCY E. SMITH

Associate Justice

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6210

J/slANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

WILLIAM F. MASTRO

REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.

2000-11592 The People, etc., respondent, v Oscar Rhodes, appellant. (Ind. No. 2911/97)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

On the court's own motion, it is

ORDERED that its decision and order on motion dated December 26, 2003, in the above-entitled matter is amended by adding to the preamble thereof after the words "Supreme Court," the word "Queens."

FLORIO, J.P., LUCIANO, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5647

S/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

DAVID S. RITTER

FRED T. SANTUCCI

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN

ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

2003-05793 The People, etc., respondent, v Jonathan Steinberg, appellant. (S.C.I. No. 1668N-00)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Poor Person Relief

Motion by the appellant for leave to prosecute an appeal from an order of the County Court, Nassau County, dated June 4, 2003, as a poor person, for the assignment of counsel and for an enlargement of time to perfect the appeal.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person is denied as unnecessary, as the appellant was granted leave to proceed as a poor person in the Supreme Court and, pursuant to Correction Law 168-n (3), his status as a poor person continues on appeal; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,

ORDERED that the stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify, and file two transcripts of the proceedings in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,

ORDERED that the clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPLR 1102[b]); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:

Kent V. Moston, Esq.

Attorney in Charge, Criminal Div.

Leagal Aid Society of Nassau Co.

1 Helen Keller Way

Hempstead, New York 11550

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his representative access to the record for the purpose of preparing the appeal; such access shall include permission to copy the papers insofar as they pertain to the appellant; and it is further,

ORDERED that the filing fee is waived (see CPLR 1103[d]); and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, SANTUCCI, ALTMAN and FLORIO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M5992

F/

GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, J.P.

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN

DANIEL F. LUCIANO

BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.

2003-06035 The People, etc., respondent, v Brian K. Whitley, appellant. (Ind. No. 1936-02)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION Motion for Poor Person Relief and to Assign Counsel Appeal from Judgment

Renewed motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered June 5, 2003, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the appellant's and the respondent's briefs; the parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other; and it is further,

ORDERED that the stenographer of the trial court is directed promptly to make, certify, and file two transcripts of the proceedings of any pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant's counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); assigned counsel is directed to turn over those transcripts to the respondent when counsel serves the appellant's brief on the respondent; and it is further,

 ORDERED that in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; and it is further,

ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned counsel with a copy of the presentence report prepared in connection with the defendant's sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the court and the District Attorney's office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to County Law § 722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:

Robert C. Mitchell, Esq.

Legal Aid Society of Suffolk Co., - Appeals Bureau

Post Office Box 1697

Riverhead, New York 11901-3398

and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant's time to perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with this court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,

ORDERED that in the event the file has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed for the limited purpose of allowing assigned counsel or his representative access to the record for the purpose of preparing the appeal; such access shall include permission to copy the papers insofar as they pertain to the appellant; and it is further,

ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.

KRAUSMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, LUCIANO, and COZIER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk

Appellant's address:

03 A 3189

Downstate Corr. Fac.

Box F

Fishkill, N.Y. 12524

APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

M6139

K/sl

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

2003-07875 The People, etc., respondent, v Melton Williams, appellant. (Ind. No. 5742/98)

DECISION, ORDER AND CERTIFICATE GRANTING LEAVE TO APPEAL ON MOTION

Application by the defendant pursuant to CPL 450.15 and 460.15 for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 10, 2003, which has been referred to me for determination.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the application is granted; the defendant is granted leave to appeal from the order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 10, 2003, made in this case; and it is further,

CERTIFIED that said order involves questions of law or fact which ought to be reviewed by the Appellate Division, Second Department; and it is further,

ORDERED that the papers which accompanied this application are deemed to be a timely notice of appeal from said order.

A. GAIL PRUDENTI

Presiding Justice