Invoice or legal notice from New York Law Journal, Aug

z sary to consider whether the plaintiffs’ the petition which alleged that the appel­ By Gail Prudent!, P.J.; Smith, Adams assigned counsel is directed to turn received, ail affidavit or affirmation' from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated June 17, z stating that it was ordered and paid over those transcripts to the respon­ o papers in opposition to the defendants’ motion were sufficient to raise a triable lant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the and Rivera, JJ. dent when counsel serves the appel­ for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript was expected; 2003. Upon the papers filed in support of o issue of fact" (Coscia v. 938 Trading crime of assault in the third degree PEOPLE, ETC., res, v. DAMIEN lant’s brief on the respondent; and it is CD WILLIAMS, ap — Motion by the respon­ or the motion and the papers filed in oppo­ further, § Corp., 283 AD2d 538; see Mariaca-Olmos under Penal Law §120.00(3), should have dent to dismiss as abandoned an ORDERED that in the event the ste­ (4) if the appellant was indigent and sition thereto, it is

c V. Mizrhy, 226 AD2d 437). In this particu­ been dismissed as inconsistent with the ORDERED that the motion is granted; lar case, one of the defendants’ examin­ finding that the appellant committed appeal from a judgment of the Supreme nographer has already prepared a copy could not afford to obtain the min­ Court, Kings County, rendered May 12, and it is further, “0 ing physicians identified limitations in acts which, if committed by an adult, of any of the minutes for a codefendant, utes or perfect the appeal, a motion ORDERED that the appellants’ time to the ranges of motion of the plaintiffs’ cer­ would have constituted the crime of 1994. then the Clerk of the trial court is direct­ in this court for leave to prosecute perfect the appeal is enlarged until Sep­ c Upon the papers filed in support of CT o vical and lumbar spines, and in the assault in the third degree under Penal ed to reproduce a copy thereof for the appeal as a poor person and for tember 7,2004, and the record or appen­ o shoulder of one of the plaintiffs sufficient Law §120.00(2) (see CPL 300.40[5]: Peo the motion and no papers having been assigned counsel; and it is further, the assignment of counsel, pur­ dix on the appeal and the appellants’ o' to preclude a finding that the defendants pie V. Finkelstein, 144 AD2d 250). filed in opposition or in relation thereto, ORDERED that upon service of a copy suant to the requirements of CPLR it is brief must be served and filed on or "0 had met their initial burden of showing LUCIANO. J.P., MASTRO. SPOLZINO of this decision and order upon it, the 1101; or O> an entitlement to summary judgment. and SKELOS, JJ., concur. ORDERED that the motion is granted Department of Probation is hereby before that date; and it is further, o Ca3 (5) an affidavit or an affirmation ORDERED that no further enlarge­ Accordingly, the Supreme Court and the appeal is dismissed (see 22 authorized and directed to provide ments of time shall be granted. CD 2 should not have granted the defendants’ motions for summary judgment. By Allman, J.P.; Miller, Luciano and Crane, JJ. NYCRR670.8[f]; CPL470.60[ll). PRUDENTI, P.J.. SMITH, ADAMS, and assigned counsel with a copy of the pre­ sentence report prepared in connection withdrawing the appeal. The appellant has failed to comply PRUDENTI. RJ., SMITH, ADAMS and RIVERA, JJ., concur. 0 PEOPLE, ETC., res, v. MARCI STEIN, RIVERA, JJ., concur. with the scheduling order. Pursuant to SMITH, J.P., S. MILLER, ADAMS, ap — (IND. NO. 0000575) — Appeals by with the defendant’s sentencing, includ­ §670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this court (22 By Ritter, J.P.; Miller, Goldstein and o RIVERA and LIFSON, JJ., concur. By Ritter, J.P.; Miller, Goldstein and ing the recommendation sheet and any o By Gail Prudenti, P.J.; Horio, Miller, the defendant (1) from a judgment of Spolzino, JJ. prior reports on the defendant which NYCRR670.4[a][5D,itis Spolzlno.JJ. c ORDERED that the parties or their Krausman and Mastro, JJ, the County Court, Westchester County (Zambelli, J.), rendered October 30, PEOPLE, ETC., res, v. ROBERT are incorporated or referred to in the attorneys are directed to show cause MATTER OF LLOIDAW. 3 report; and it is further, (ANONYMOUS). ADMINISTRATION FOR CD PEOPLE, ETC., res v. JAMAL GOX, ap 2001, convicting her of rape in the third WILSON, ap — Motion by the appellant before this court why an order should 3 ORDERED that in the event an issue as CHILDREN’S SERVICES, res, MARIA W. — (IND. NOS. 287/03, 288/03. 289/03, degree, sodomy in the third degree (five for leave to prosecute an appeal from a or should not be made and entered dis­ to the legality, propriety, or excessive­ (ANONYMOUS), ap — Motion by the AND 290/03) — Appeal by the defen­ counts), sexual abuse in the third judgment of the County Court, Nassau missing the appeal in the above-entitled ness of the sentence is raised on appeal, counsel assigned to represent the dant, as limited by his motion, from four degree (two counts), endangering the County, rendered April 15, 2004, as a proceeding for failure to comply with or if assigned counsel cites or relies appellant in a proceeding before the sentences of the Supreme Court, welfare of a child, and unlawfully deal­ poor person, and for the assignment of the scheduling order dated June 10. counsel. upon the probation report in a brief or Family Court, Kings County, to be Queens County (Chin-Brandt, J.), all ing with a child in the first degree, upon 2004, by each filing an affirmation or affi­ motion in any other way, counsel shall relieved, for the assignment of new imposed March 31,2003, on the ground a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, Upon the papers filed in support of davit on that issue in the office of the provide a complete copy of such report counsel to prosecute an appeal from an that the sentences are excessive. and (2), by permission, from an order of the motion and no papers having been Clerk of this court and serving one copy and any attachments to the court and order of the Family Court, Kings ORDERED that the sentences are the same court dated July 29, 2003, filed in opposition and in relation there­ of the same on each other on or before to, it is the District Attorney’s office prior to the County, dated March 29, 2004, and for affirmed. No opinion. which, after a hearing, denied her filing of such brief or motion; and it is August 23, 2004; and it is further, leave to the appellant to prosecute the PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, H. MILLER, motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to ORDERED that the motion is granted; ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, further, appeal as a poor person. KRAUSMAN and MASTRO, JJ., concur. vacate the judgment of conviction. and it is further, or his designee, is directed to serve a ORDERED that pursuant to County Upon the papers filed in support of By Altman, J.P.: Crane, Fisher and Lif- ORDERED that the judgment and ORDERED that the appeal will be copy of this decision and order upon heard on the original papers (including Law §722 the following named attorney the motion and no papers having been son, JJ. order are reversed, on the law and the the parties or their attorneys. filed in opposition or In relation thereto, is assigned as counsel to prosecute the facts, the motion is granted, the judg­ a certified transcript of the proceedings, AMATO, res, v. LORD & TAYLOR, appeal: MATTER OF GERALD W. it is ment is vacated, and a new trial is if any) and on the appellant’s and the (ANONYMOUS), ap — Appeal by Gerald INC., ET AL., ap — (INDEX NO. 2420/02) Robert Rountry, Esq. ORDERED that the motion is granted ordered. respondent’s briefs; the parties are — In an action to recover damages for 396 Roosevelt Avenue W. from an order of the Family Court, and the counsel assigned by the Family Contrary to the findings of the hearing directed to file nine copies of their personal injuries, the defendants appeal Freeport. New York 11520 Queens County, dated March 16, 2004, Court is relieved from representing the court, the defendant was denied a fair respective briefs and to serve one copy from an order of the Supreme Court, and it is further, The appellant’s brief was filed in the appellant on the appeal; and it is further, trial by the People’s failure to disclose on each other; and it is further, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), ORDERED that the appellant’s time to office of the Clerk of this court on July ORDERED that said counsel is direct­ that two of the complainants had filed ORDERED that the stenographer of entered January 15, 2004, which granted notices of claim with the defendant’s perfect the appeal is enlarged; assigned 27, 2004. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the ed to turn over all papers in the action the trial court is directed promptly to the plaintiff’s motion for leave to rear­ employer, a school district, attempting counsel shall prosecute the appeal expe­ Rules of this court (see 22 NYCRR to the new counsel herein assigned; and make, certify, and file two transcripts of gue their prior motion for summary to hold it responsible for the defendant’s ditiously in accordance with this court’s 670.4[al(2]), it is it is further. the proceedings of any pretrial hearings, judgment dismissing the complaint. alleged criminal conduct (see Giglio v. rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1, et seq.) and ORDERED that the respondent’s brief ORDERED that the appeal will be of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of shall be served and filed within 45 days which had been granted in an order of United States, 405 US 150; Brady v. Mary­ written directions; and it is further, heard on the original papers (including the imposition of sentence in this the same court entered August 4, 2003, land. 373 US 83). The hearing court ORDERED that In the event the file of the date of this order. a certified transcript of the proceedings, action, except for those minutes previ­ and, upon reargument, in effect, vacated ignored the testimony of the attorney for has been sealed, it is hereby unsealed MATTER OF RONIS, res, v. if any) and on the briefs of the appellant, ously transcribed and certified (see 22 the order entered August 4, 2003, and those two complainants that the attor­ for the limited purpose of allowing ORGANJANOV, ap — Appeal by Victor the respondent, and the Law Guardian, if NYCRR 671.9); and it is further. denied the motion for summary judg­ ney had told prosecutors about the ORDERED that in the event that the assigned counsel or his representative Organjanov from an order of the Family any. The parties are directed to file nine ment. notices of claim before the defendant’s access to the record for the purpose of Court, Kings County, dated May 21, copies of their respective briefs and to case was tried to a conclusion before a ORDERED that the order is reversed, trial, and a letter from the school district jury, the stenographer shall also make, preparing the appeal; such access shall 2003. The appellant’s brief was filed in serve one copy on each other (22 on the law, with costs, the motion for faxed to the District Attorney’s office include permission to copy the papers the office of the Clerk of this court on NYCRR 670.9[d][l][ii]; Family Ct Act certify, and file two transcripts of the leave to reargue is denied, and the order almost three months before the trial insofar as they pertain to the appellant; July 26. 2004. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) §1116); and it is further, minutes of proceedings during jury entered August 4, 2003, is reinstated. commenced which acknowledged that and it is further, of the Rules of this court (see 22 ORDERED that the stenographer(s) selection; and it is further, The Supreme Court erred in granting two of the complainants had “civil ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial ORDERED that assigned counsel is NYCRR 670.4(al[21). It is and/or the transcription service(s) the plaintiff’s motion for leave to rear­ claims against” the school district. “Neg- court shall furnish one certified trars- directed to serve a copy of this order ORDERED that the respondent’s brief is/are required promptly to make and gue. The plaintiff did not establish that ligent, as well as deliberate, nondisclo­ upon the Clerk of the court from which shall be served and filed within 45 days certify two transcripts of the proceed­ script of each ot the proceedings set the Supreme Court misapprehended the sure may deny due process. Good faith, the appeal is taken. of the date of this order. ings, if any. except for those minutes law or the facts in granting the defen­ forth above to the appellant’s counsel, therefore, may not excuse even a negli­ RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, GOLDSTEIN, previously transcribed and certified (22 dants' prior motion for summary judg­ without charge (see CPL 460.70); MATTER OF CORBY, ap, v. CORBY, gent failure to disclose unrequesled and SPOLZINO. JJ., concur. NYCRR 671.9); in the case of stenogra­ ment dismissing the complaint (see assigned counsel is directed to turn res — Appeal by Joann Corby from an exculpatory evidence where that evi­ By Ritter, J.P.; Miller, Goldstein and phers, both transcripts shall be filed CPLR2221[d](2]; Collins v. Stone, over those transcripts to the respon­ order of the Family Court, Suffolk dence is highly material to the defense” Spoizino, JJ. with the clerk of the Family Court, and _AD3d_ [2d Dept, June 7,2004]), Fur­ dent when counsel serves the appel­ County, dated April 1, 2004. Pursuant to (People V. Simmons, 36 NY2d 126,132). lant’s brief on the respondent; and it is the clerk of the Family Court shall fur­ ther, a motion for leave to reargue is not PEOPLE, ETC., res, v. DOREEN §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this court nish one of such certified transcripts to Evidence that two of the complainants further. designed to provide an unsuccessful MANNION, ap — (S.G.I. NO. 03-01625) (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a]t2]), it is the appellant’s counsel, without charge; were seeking damages based on the ORDERED that in the event the ste­ party with successive opportunities to — Motion by the respondent to dismiss ORDERED that the appellant's time to in the case of transcription services, one defendant’s conduct which only they nographer has already prepared a copy perfect the appeal by causing the origi­ present arguments different from those had witnessed was highly relevant to the an appeal from a judgment of the transcript shall be filed with the clerk of originally presented (see McGill v. Gold­ of any of the minutes for a codefendant, County Court. Westchester County, ren­ nal papers constituting the record on issue of their credibility (see Giglio v. the Family Court and one transcript man, 261 AD2d 593,594; Matter of Mayer then the Clerk of the trial court is direct­ dered April 26, 2004, on the ground that the appeal to be filed in the office of the United States, supra at 154-, People v. shall be delivered to the assigned coun­ V. National Arts Club. 192 AD2d 863,865; ed to reproduce a copy thereof for it was untimely taken. Clerk of this court (see 22 NYCRR Novoa, 70 NY2d 490,496; People v. sel. Assigned counsel is directed to pro­ Foley V. Roche, 68 AD2d 558, 567-568). assigned counsel; and it is further, Upon the papers filed in support of 670.4[a][2J) and by serving and filing vide copies of said transcripts to all of Wallert, 98 AD2d 47). The failure to turn ORDERED that upon service of a copy the appellant’s brief on the appeal is Here, the plaintiff did not originally pres­ over this evidence was aggravated by the motion and the papers filed in rela­ the other parties to the appeal, includ­ ent the argument regarding the applica­ of this decision and order upon it, the tion thereto, it is enlarged until September 3, 2004. the prosecutor’s argument during sum­ ing the Law Guardian, if any. when coun­ bility of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. Department of Probation is hereby ORDERED that the motion is granted mation that there was no evidence that MATTER OF DALTIUO, ap, v. sel serves the appellant’s brief upon In any event, even if we were to find authorized and directed to provide and the appeal is dismissed (see CPL the complainants were brining civil law­ DALTIUO, res — Appeal by Natale those parties; and it is further, that reargument was proper, the assigned counsel with a copy of the pre­ 460.10[l];470-60[l]). suits as a result of the defendant’s con­ D’Altilio from an order of the Family ORDERED that pursuant to Family Supreme Court improperly found that a sentence report prepared in connection RITTER, J.P.. S. MILLER, GOLDSTEIN, duct (see People v. Waltert, supra). There Court, Orange County, dated January Court Act §1120 the following named question of fact exists as to whether res with the defendant’s sentencing, includ­ and SPOLZINO, JJ., concur. is a reasonable probability that this fail­ 30, 2004. The appellant’s brief was filed attorney is assigned as counsel to prose­ ipsa loquitur may be invoked. The plain­ ing the recommendation sheet and any in the office of the Clerk of this court ure to disclose affected the outcome of By Ritter, J.E.; MIUer, Goldstein and cute the appeal: tiff’s proof consisted only of the bare prior reports on the defendant which on June 18, 2004. Pursuant to the trial (see People v. Bryce, 88 NY2d Spoizino, JJ. Carol Kahn, Esq. affirmation of his attorney who “demon­ are incorporated or referred to in the §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this court 124, 128; People v. Baxley, 84 NY2d 208, PEOPLE, ETC., res, v. HAIRO 225 Broadway-Suite 1515 strated no personal knowledge of the report; and it is further, (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it is 214). New York, New York 10007 manner In which the accident occurred” ORDERED that in the event an issue as RENTARIA, a/k/a JAIRO RENTARIA ap — ORDERED that the respondent’s time We reject the People’s contention that (212) 2274)206 (Zuckerman v. Cit)’ of New York. 49 NY2d to the legality, propriety, or excessive­ Motion by the respondent to dismiss as to serve and file a brief on the appeal is the defendant should have known that 557,563). ness of the sentence is raised on appeal, abandoned an appeal from a judgment enlarged until September 15,2004. Continued on the following page the complainants had filed the notices of