This article is the first of a two-part analysis of a reemerged issue, brought to the forefront by Charalabidis v. Elnagar, 188 A.D.3d 44 (2d Dept. 2020) and Matter of Cassini, 182 A.D.3d 1 (2d Dept. 2020), wherein two courts did not issue written decisions and orders following written motions thereby rendering those orders nonappealable. Charalabidis was uniquely egregious in that therein a seasoned jurist, intimately familiar with the six most basic elements of CPLR 2219(a) that comprise the time and the form of an order, persistently thwarted every effort by the aggrieved party to bring that order up on appeal by refusing to properly sign the order in accordance with 2219(a). The facts unquestionably establish that the jurist's intent was to frustrate that party's statutory right to take an appeal from the adverse order because such an "order" is not an appealable paper. The aggrieved litigant sustained unrecoverable loss of time and money attributable to their multiple, futile efforts, motions and an eventual appeal, to secure their unconditional, nondiscretionary, fundamental statutory right to an appeal. The facts in Cassini, below, suggest no deliberate, improper conduct.