Appellate Division Second Department Motion List released on: February 2, 2018 By Dillon, J.P.; Hinds-Radix, Maltese and Lasalle, JJ.

Vector Structural Preservation Corp., res, v. Rialto-Capital Urban Renewal Company, LLC, ap, et al., def — Motion by the respondent, inter alia, to dismiss appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered December 1, 2016, and a judgment of the same court dated December 12, 2016, on the ground that the appellant’s appendix is inadequate. Cross motion by the appellant to impose a sanction upon the respondent and for an award of costs and an attorney’s fee. Separate motion by the appellant to preclude the respondent from filing a brief and deem the appeal submitted without opposition. Separate cross motion by the respondent to strike stated portions of the appellant’s appendix and the appellant’s brief on the ground that they contain or refer to matter dehors the record. Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief.Upon the papers filed in support of the motions and the cross motions, and the papers filed in opposition thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the branch of the respondent’s motion which is to dismiss the appeals is denied on condition that on or before March 5, 2018, the appellant serve and file a supplemental appendix which contains the exhibits annexed to the papers filed in connection with the motion that was determined by the order entered December 1, 2016, that were omitted from the appellant’s appendix; and it is further,ORDERED that the respondent’s motion is otherwise denied; and it is further,ORDERED that the appellant’s cross motion is denied; and it is further,ORDERED that the appellant’s motion is denied; and it is further,ORDERED that the branch of the respondent’s cross motion which is to strike pages A424 through A434 of the appellant’s appendix is granted and on or before March 5, 2018, the appellant shall remove those pages from the copies of the appellant’s appendix filed with the Clerk of this Court; and it is further,ORDERED that the respondent’s cross motion is otherwise denied; and it is further,ORDERED that the application is granted, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 4, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.DILLON, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, MALTESE and LASALLE, JJ., concur.By Leventhal, J.P.; Cohen, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ.MATTER of Nicole Haims, ap, v. John Lehmann, res — Motion by the appellant to stay enforcement of so much of an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated December 18, 2017, as discontinued the respondent’s therapeutic supervised visitation with the subject child and directed that the respondent have certain unsupervised visitation, with the respondent providing transportation for his parental access, and to direct that the respondent shall have supervised weekly visitation with the subject child, to be supervised by Benna Stober, pending hearing and determination of an appeal from the order.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition and in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, and enforcement of the eleventh, twelfth, and fifteenth through fortieth decretal paragraphs of the order dated December 18, 2017, is stayed and the respondent shall continue to have supervised weekly visitation with the subject child, to be supervised by Benna Stober, pending hearing and determination of the appeal; and it is further,ORDERED that the first through fourth decretal paragraphs of the order to show cause of this Court dated December 29, 2017, in the above-entitled matter are vacated forthwith.LEVENTHAL, J.P., COHEN, BARROS and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.By Leventhal, J.P.; Cohen, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ.MATTER of Nicole Haims, ap, v. John Lehmann, res — Appeal by Nicole Haims from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated December 18, 2017. Pursuant to §670.4(a) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it isORDERED 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, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this  ; and it is further,ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this  , 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 of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the appeal; or(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation stating 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 and paid for, 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 actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above has been taken within 30 days of the date of this  , the Clerk of the Court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.LEVENTHAL, J.P., COHEN, BARROS and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Lasalle, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.U.S. Bank N.A., etc., res, v. Susan Jacob, appellant def — Motion by the respondent to dismiss appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered October 25, 2016, and December 23, 2016, respectively, for failure to timely perfect.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted and the appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[e]).ROMAN, J.P., LASALLE, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Rivera, J.P.; Dillon, Connolly and Iannacci, JJ.Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., etc., res, v. Shraga Kahana appellants def — Motion by the appellants for leave to reargue an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered October 5, 2015, which was determined by decision and order of this Court dated September 13, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is denied, with $100 costs.RIVERA, J.P., DILLON, CONNOLLY and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.By Dillon, J.P.; Austin, Miller and Hinds-Radix, JJ.Strong Real Estate, LLC, plf-ap, v. 55 Town Line, LLC res, Robert Weigel, def-ap — Motion by the defendant-appellant on appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 9, 2017, to enlarge the time to perfect his appeal, and for this Court to take judicial notice of, inter alia, certain deeds. Separate applications by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect the appeals.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the applications and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the branch of the motion by Robert Weigel which is to enlarge the time to perfect his appeal, and the applications to enlarge the time to perfect the appeals are granted, the appellants’ time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until April 2, 2018, and the joint record or appendix on the appeals and the appellants’ respective briefs shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for this Court to take judicial notice of, inter alia, certain deeds is denied.DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and HINDS-RADIX, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Lasalle, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.Kamal Ahmed, res, v. Masum N. Ahmed ap — Motion by the respondent, inter alia, to strike stated portions of the record and the appellants’ brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered November 18, 2016, on the ground that they contain or refer to matter dehors the record. Cross motion by the appellants to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto and upon the papers filed in support of the cross motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the branches of the motion which are to strike pages 515 through 552 of the record and references to the material on those pages in the appellants’ brief are granted, pages 515 through 552 of the record and references to the material on those pages in the appellants’ brief are stricken, and on or before March 5, 2018, the appellants shall remove pages 515 through 552 from the copies of the record filed with the Clerk of this Court and shall delete references to the material on those pages from the copies of the appellants’ brief filed with the Clerk of this Court or serve and file a replacement appellants’ brief that does not contain references to the material on those pages; and it is further,ORDERED that the branches of the motion which are to strike pages 1177 through 1223 of the record and references to the material on those pages in the appellants’ brief are denied on condition that on or before March 5, 2018, the appellants properly settle the transcript contained on those pages in accordance with CPLR 5525, and either remove the transcript pages from the copies of the record filed with the Clerk of the Court and serve and file a supplemental record containing the corrected transcript pages or serve and file a supplemental record containing an errata sheet, if changes need to be made to the transcript, or advise the Court, in writing, that no changes were made following settlement of the transcript; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied; and it is further,ORDERED that the cross motion is granted, the appellants’ time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until March 20, 2018, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.ROMAN, J.P., LASALLE, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.MATTER of Destinee L. M. L. (Anonymous). Heartshare St. Vincents Services, petitioner- res, Marlene O. (Anonymous), respondent- ap — (Proceeding No. 1)MATTER of Ezekiel J. L. (Anonymous). Heartshare St. Vincents Services, petitioner- res, Marlene O. (Anonymous), respondent- ap — (Proceeding No. 2)MATTER of Jessiah L. (Anonymous). Heartshare St. Vincents Services, petitioner- res, Marlene O. (Anonymous), respondent- ap — (Proceeding No. 3)MATTER of Angel J. L. (Anonymous). Heartshare St. Vincents Services, petitioner- res, Marlene O. (Anonymous), respondent- ap — (Proceeding No. 4) — On the Court’s own motion, it isORDERED that the orders on certification of this Court dated August 8, 2017 (two orders), and January 30, 2017, respectively, and the decision and order on motion of this Court datedJanuary 26, 2018, in the above-entitled matter, on an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated December 12, 2016, are amended by deleting from the first paragraphs thereof the date “December 2, 2016,” and substituting therefor the date “December 12, 2016.”SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.MATTER of Eric Gonzalez, pet, v. ShawnDya L. Simpson res — Application by the petitioner to withdraw a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the proceeding is deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Dillon, Hinds-Radix and Christopher, JJ.Islom Muhammodiev, res, v. Brighton Development, LLC defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants-respondents defendants; Lore Concrete, LLC, third-party defendant- res-res — Motion by the defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants-respondents to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal and a cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 13, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellants-respondents’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the joint record or appendix on the appeal and cross appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][1]) and the appellants-respondents’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted; and it is further,ORDERED that the respondent-appellant shall serve and file the answering brief, including the points of argument on the cross appeal, in accordance with the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]).SCHEINKMAN, P.J., DILLON, HINDS-RADIX and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Dillon, J.P.; Austin, Miller and Hinds-Radix, JJ.Jose Salinas, ap, v. 64 Jefferson Apartments, LLC, res — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated March 7, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and HINDS-RADIX, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Leventhal, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., ap, v. Gino Santiago, res — (Action No. 1)PEOPLE, etc., ap, v. Christopher Soto, res — (Action No. 2)— Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 11, 2016Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted and the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 5, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., LEVENTHAL, BARROS and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Leventhal, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ.Agnes R. Valfer ap, v. Village of Freeport res — Motion by the appellants to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 13, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the record on appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., LEVENTHAL, BARROS and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Sgroi, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.A. D. G., etc., res, v. Childrens Ark Daycare Center, Inc., ap — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 1, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 19, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.ROMAN, J.P., SGROI, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Mastro, J.P.; Balkin, Cohen and Duffy, JJ.State of New York, res, v. Laquila Group, Inc., ap — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 17, 2017Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.MASTRO, J.P., BALKIN, COHEN and DUFFY, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Leventhal, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ.US Bank, NA, res, v. Marisol Villatoro appellants def — Motion by the appellants to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, both dated September 26, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellants’ time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeals and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., LEVENTHAL, BARROS and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Leventhal, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ.Luis Montalvo, res, v. Gianni Cedeno ap — Motion by the appellants to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 24, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., LEVENTHAL, BARROS and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Lasalle, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.US Bank National Association, res, v. Sigalit Aharon Ziv, appellant def — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered December 21, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until February 13, 2018, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.ROMAN, J.P., LASALLE, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Lasalle, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Timothy J. Bittrolff, ap — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered May 2, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until February 13, 2018, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.ROMAN, J.P., LASALLE, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Dillon, J.P.; Austin, Miller and Hinds-Radix, JJ.Frederick M. Cioffi ap, v. S.M. Foods, Inc. defendants third-party plf-res, Atlanta Foods International, et al., defendants-res, Village of Tuckahoe, et al., third-party def-res — Motion by the appellants to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated April 11, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellants’ time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until February 13, 2018, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and HINDS-RADIX, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Sgroi, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.Erin McGuinness, etc. res, v. James Shane ap — Motion by the respondents to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 21, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the respondents’ time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the respondents’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.ROMAN, J.P., SGROI, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Sgroi, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.Violet Suk, res-ap, v. George Comfort and Sons, Inc. appellants-res, Excel Security Corp. res — Motion by the respondent-appellant to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal and a cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 2, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the respondent-appellant’s time to serve and file an answering brief, including the points of argument on the cross appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]), is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the answering brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted..ROMAN, J.P., SGROI, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Sgroi, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.MATTER of Town of Huntington, ap, v. County of Suffolk, res — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated February 15, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.ROMAN, J.P., SGROI, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Leventhal, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ.MATTER of Erika Singer, pet, v. Theresa L. Egan, etc. res — Motion by the respondents to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 which was transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 22, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the respondents’ time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the respondents’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., LEVENTHAL, BARROS and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.By Dillon, J.P.; Austin, Miller and Hinds-Radix, JJ.Mike Tai Nero, ap, v. Laura Fiore, res — Motion by the respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated February 25, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 16, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and HINDS-RADIX, JJ., concur.By Dillon, J.P.; Austin, Miller and Hinds-Radix, JJ.Iftikar Ahmad, ap, v. New York City Department of Education res — (Matter No. 1)MATTER of Iftikar Ahmad, ap, v. City of New York res — (Matter No. 2) — Motion by the respondents to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 30, 2016, and October 18, 2016, respectively.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the respondents’ time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 16, 2018, and the respondents’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and HINDS-RADIX, JJ., concur.By Dillon, J.P.; Austin, Miller and Hinds-Radix, JJ.Roger Baillargeon ap, v. Kings County Waterproofing Corp., respondent def — Motion by the respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 7, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 16, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and HINDS-RADIX, JJ., concur.By Rivera, J.P.; Miller, Nelson and Iannacci, JJ.Linda Yarwood, etc., plf-res, v. County of Suffolk ap, Nadine Teich, def-res, et al., def — Motion by the plaintiff-respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 23, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the plaintiff-respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until April 3, 2018, and the plaintiff-respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.RIVERA, J.P., MILLER, BRATHWAITE NELSON and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Lasalle, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.Anthony Vaccaro, res, v. Town of Islip appellants def — Motion by the respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated February 1, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 16, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.ROMAN, J.P., LASALLE, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Sgroi, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.Maria Godino, etc., plf-res, v. Dennis M. Lemke defendants-res, Nassau County Sheriffs Department, ap — Motion by the plaintiff-respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated April 8, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the plaintiff-respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the plaintiff-respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.ROMAN, J.P., SGROI, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Sgroi, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.Rolando Faistman, ap, v. Sabrina Faistman, res — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 27, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, the appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until February 13, 2018, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.ROMAN, J.P., SGROI, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.MATTER of Luna v. (Anonymous). Administration for Childrens Services, petitioner- appellant; Natasha v. (Anonymous), respondent- res — (Proceeding No. 1)MATTER of Julia D. (Anonymous). Administration for Childrens Services, petitioner- appellant; Natasha v. (Anonymous), respondent- res — (Proceeding No. 2) — Appeal by Administration for Children’s Services from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated October 11, 2017. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED that the time for the respondent to serve and file a brief on the appeal is enlarged until March 12, 2018.MATTER of Jacob P. E. (Anonymous). Administration for Childrens Services, petitioner- res, Gustavo P. S. (Anonymous), res-res — Appeal by Gustavo P. S. from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated June 12, 2017. The appellant’s brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this Court on January 29, 2018. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this  , the briefs for the petitioner-respondent and the attorney for the child in the above-entitled appeal shall be served and filed.MATTER of Elci Mejia, res, v. Cornelius Stubbs, ap — Appeal by Cornelius Stubbs from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated September 25, 2017. The appellant’s brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this Court on January 29, 2018. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this  , the briefs for the respondent and the attorney for the child in the above-entitled appeal shall be served and filed.MATTER of Arjan Gazaferi pet-res, v. Eden Wilson, res-res — Appeal by Eden Wilson from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County, dated March 16, 2017. The appellant’s brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this Court on January 29, 2018. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this  , the briefs for the petitioners-respondents and the attorney for the child in the above-entitled appeal shall be served and filed.MATTER of Daiyah D. F. F. (Anonymous). Graham Windham Services to Families and Children, petitioner-res, Darren S. (Anonymous), res-res — Appeal by Darren S. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated April 10, 2017. The appellant’s brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this Court on Janaury 30, 2018. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this  , the briefs for the petitioner-respondent and the attorney for the child in the above-entitled appeal shall be served and filed.MATTER of Alana H. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Community and Family Services, petitioner-res, Caitlin M. (Anonymous), res-res — (Proceeding No. 1)MATTER of Sophia H. (Anonymous). Dutchess County Department of Community and Family Services, petitioner-res, Caitlin M. (Anonymous), res-res — (Proceeding No. 2) — Appeal by Caitlin M., from an order ot the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated August 31, 2017. The appellant’s brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this Court on January 26, 2018. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this  , the briefs for the petitioner-respondent and the attorney for the children in the above-entitled appeal shall be served and filed.Jesse Cole, res, v. Samantha Cole, ap — Appeal by Samantha Cole from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated September 12, 2017. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED that the time for the attorney for the children to serve and file a brief on the appeal is enlarged until February 23, 2018.By Leventhal, J.P.; Chambers, Miller and Duffy, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Rasheen Everett, ap — Motion by the appellant pro se to relieve counsel assigned to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered December 5, 2013, and for assignment of new counsel. Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief. The appellant’s motion to dispense with printing and for the assignment of counsel was granted on February 24, 2014, and the following named attorney was assigned to prosecute the appeal:Paul Skip Laisure, Esq.Appellate Advocates111 John Street – 9th FloorNew York, New York 10038Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted; previously assigned counsel is directed to turn over all papers in the action to new counsel herein assigned; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to County Law §722 the following named attorney is assigned to prosecute the appeal:Yasmin Daley Duncan, Esq.386 Parkside AvenueBrooklyn, NY 11226and it is further,ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order on motion upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned 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 to provide additional copies to this Court upon demand, and to provide additional copies to this Court upon demand; and it is further,ORDERED that the brief filed by former assigned counsel is stricken and new assigned counsel shall serve and file a replacement brief expeditiously in accordance with this Court’s rules (see 22 NYCRR 670.1 et seq.) and written directions; and it is further,ORDERED that the application is denied as academic.LEVENTHAL, J.P., CHAMBERS, MILLER and DUFFY, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Rivera, Dillon, Balkin, and Chambers, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., ex rel. Karen Accomando, on behalf of J. A. A. (Anonymous) and G. A. (Anonymous), pet-res, v. Elizabeth Kirschner-Melendez, ap — Appeal by Elizabeth Kirschner-Melendez from an judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated October 17, 2017. Pursuant to Family Court Act §§1118 and 1120, and upon the certification of Karen Marie Caggiano, Esq., dated January 29, 2018, it isORDERED that the appellant is granted leave to proceed as a poor person on the appeal and the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:Karen Marie Caggiano, Esq.198 Crestwood DriveShirley, NY 11967ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the briefs of the appellant, the respondent, and the attorney for the children, if any. The parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other (22 NYCRR 670.9[d][1][ii]; Family Ct Act §1116); and it is further,ORDERED that the stenographer(s) and/or the transcription service(s) is/are required promptly to make and certify two transcripts of the proceedings, if any, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (22 NYCRR 671.9); in the case of stenographers, both transcripts shall be filed with the clerk of the Supreme Court, and the clerk of the Supreme Court shall furnish one of such certified transcripts to the appellant’s assigned counsel, without charge; in the case of transcription services, one transcript shall be filed with the clerk of the Supreme Court and one transcript shall be delivered to the assigned counsel. Assigned counsel is directed to provide copies of said transcripts to all of the other parties to the appeal, including the attorney for the children, if any, when counsel serves the appellant’s brief upon those parties; and it is further,ORDERED that assigned counsel shall 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 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 Supreme Court, and the assigned counsel shall notify this Court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this order; and it is further,ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this 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 Supreme Court proceeding to be transcribed for the appeal; or(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation stating that the transcripts have been received, and indicating the date received; or(3) if the transcripts have not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that this order has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken, the date thereof, and the date by which the transcripts are 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  , the Clerk of this Court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., RIVERA, DILLON, BALKIN and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur.MATTER of Quadir C. B. (Anonymous). SCO Family of Services, petitioner-res, Emmanuel D. (Anonymous), res-res — Appeal by Emmanuel D. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated February 10, 2017. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED 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 appellant’s brief on the appeal is enlarged until February 28, 2018.By Leventhal, J.P.; Chambers, Miller and Duffy, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Anthony Robinson, ap — Motion by the appellant pro se to relieve counsel assigned to prosecute an appeal from a order of the County Court, Suffolk County, dated March 21, 2017, and for assignment of new counsel. The appellant’s motion to dispense with printing and for the assignment of counsel was granted on October 27, 2017, and the following named attorney was assigned to prosecute the appeal:Laurette Mulry, Esq.Legal Aid Society of Suffolk County – Appeals Bureau300 Center DrivePO Box 1697Riverhead, New York 11901-3398Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted; previously assigned counsel is directed to turn over all papers in the action to new counsel herein assigned; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to County Law §722 the following named attorney is assigned to prosecute the appeal:Marina M. Martielli, Esq.15 Woodfield AvenueE. Quogue, NY 11942and it is further,ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order on motion upon it, the Department of Probation is hereby authorized and directed to provide assigned 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 to provide additional copies to this Court upon demand, and to provide additional copies to this Court upon demand; 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.LEVENTHAL, J.P., CHAMBERS, MILLER and DUFFY, JJ., concur.By Mastro, J.P.; Balkin, Cohen and Duffy, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Sharrahn Walton, ap — Motion by assigned counsel to be relieved of the assignment to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County, rendered May 11, 2016, and for the assignment of new counsel. The appellant’s motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for assignment of counsel was granted on December 20, 2017, and the following named attorney was assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:James LicataOffice of the Public Defender11 New Hempstead RoadNew City, New York 10956-3664Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, and the former assigned counsel is directed to turn over all papers in the action to new counsel herein assigned; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to County Law §722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:Gary E. Eisenberg, Esq.10 Esquire Road Suite 10New City, NY 10956and it is further,ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order on motion 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 to provide additional copies to this Court upon demand; 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 assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order on motion upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.MASTRO, J.P., BALKIN, COHEN and DUFFY, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Leventhal, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ.PEOPLE, res, v. James Flynn, ap — Motion by the appellant for leave to prosecute an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 23, 2017, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in relation thereto, it isORDERED 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 of any hearing held in connection with the order dated August 23, 2017, 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 the branch of the motion which is to assign counsel is granted and pursuant to County Law §722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute theappeal:Francine Shraga, Esq.869 East 12th StreetBrooklyn, NY 11230and it is further,ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order on motion 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 or considered by the trial court in connection with the appellant’s risk level determination, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the appellant which are incorporated or referred to in the report; 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 the filing fee is waived (see CPLR 1102[d]); and it is further,ORDERED that assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order on motion upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., LEVENTHAL, BARROS and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.MATTER of Genella Lintao, ap, v. Richard Delgado, res — Appeal by Genella Lintao from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated August 17, 2017. The appellant’s brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this Court on January 29, 2018. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this order, the brief for the respondent in the above-entitled appeal shall be served and filed.By Leventhal, J.P.; Cohen, Maltese and Barros, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Daniel Cruz, ap — Motion by assigned counsel to be relieved of the assignment to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County, rendered September 19, 2017, and for the assignment of new counsel. The appellant’s motion for leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and for assignment of counsel was granted on December 4, 2017, and the following named attorney was assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:James D. Licata, Esq.Office of the Public Defender11 New Hempstead RoadNew City, New York 10956-3664Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted, and the former assigned counsel is directed to turn over all papers in the action to new counsel herein assigned; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to County Law §722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:John R. Lewis, Esq.36 Hemlock DriveSleepy Hollow, NY 10591and it is further,ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order on motion 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 to provide additional copies to this Court upon demand; 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 assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order on motion upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.LEVENTHAL, J.P., COHEN, MALTESE and BARROS, JJ., concur.MATTER of Jamiah C. (Anonymous). Westchester County Department of Social Services, petitioner-res, Victoria O. (Anonymous), res-ap, et al., res — (Proceeding No. 1)MATTER of Donyea C. (Anonymous). Westchester County Department of Social Services, petitioner-res, Victoria O. (Anonymous), res-ap, et al., res — (Proceeding No. 2) N-1637-13, N-1638-13) — Appeals by Victoria O. from two orders of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated May 15, 2013, and August 23, 2016, respectively. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED that the time for the attorney for the children to serve and file a brief on the appeals is enlarged until March 5, 2018.MATTER of Tanisha M. M. (Anonymous). Toni D. S. (Anonymous), petitioner-res, Administration for Childrens Services respondents-res, Anthony M. (Anonymous), res-res — (Proceeding No. 1)MATTER of Anthony C. M. (Anonymous). Toni D. S. (Anonymous), petitioner-res, Administration for Childrens Services respondents-res, Anthony M. (Anonymous), res-res — (Proceeding No. 2) — Appeals by Anthony M. from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County, both dated November 2, 2017. By order on certification of this Court dated December 26, 2017, the following attorney was assigned as counsel for the appellant on the appeals:Rhonda R. Weir, Esq.26 Court Street, Suite 1917Brooklyn, NY 11242347-328-2680By letter dated January 25, 2018, the assigned counsel has informed this Court that the appellant wishes to proceed with the appeals. Pursuant to §670.4(a) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it isORDERED that the appeals in the above-entitled proceedings 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, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this  ; and it is further,ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this  , 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 stating that the transcript has been received, and indicating the date received; or(3) if the transcript has not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that the order on certification of this Court dated December 26, 2017, has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeals were 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  , the Clerk of this Court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeals to show cause why the appeals should or should not be dismissed.MATTER of Baby Boy R. (Anonymous), a/k/a Miguel R. (Anonymous). SCO Family Services, petitioner-res, Diana R. (Anonymous), a/k/a Diana L. (Anonymous), res-res — Appeal by Diana R., a/k/a Diana L., from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated December 19, 2016. The appellant’s replacement brief was filed in the office of the Clerk of this Court on January 30, 2018. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]), it isORDERED that within 30 days of the date of this order, the briefs for the petitioner-respondent and the attorney for the child in the above-entitled appeal shall be served and filed.MATTER of Elia Hernandez-Bueno, ap, v. Alicia Perez, res — Appeal by Elia Hernandez-Bueno from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated October 26, 2017. By order on certification of this Court dated December 1, 2017, the following attorney was assigned as counsel for the appellant on the appeal, and was directed, inter alia, to contact the appellant and determine the appellant’s interest in perfecting the appeal:Nicole Barnum, Esq.225 Broadway, Suite 2605New York, NY 10007917-371-7241By letter dated January 23, 2018, assigned counsel notified the Court that she has been unable to contact the appellant.On the Court’s own motion, it isORDERED that the parties are directed to show cause before this Court why an order should or should not be made and entered relieving the assigned counsel for the appellant and dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding 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 February 23, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court, or her designee, is directed to serve a copy of this order to show cause upon the parties or their attorneys, and upon the appellant, by regular mail.MATTER of Casilda Gonzalez, res, v. Jose A. Jimenez, ap — Appeal by Jose A. Jimenez from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated August 31, 2017. By order on certification of this Court dated December 18, 2017, the following attorney was assigned as counsel for the appellant on the appeal, and was directed, inter alia, to contact the appellant and determine the appellant’s interest in perfecting the appeal:Amy L. Colvin, Esq.9 Everette PlaceHuntington, NY 11743631-424-8495By letter dated January 14, 2018, assigned counsel notified the Court that she has been unable to contact the appellant.On the Court’s own motion, it isORDERED that the parties are directed to show cause before this Court why an order should or should not be made and entered relieving the assigned counsel for the appellant and dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding 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 February 23, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court, or her designee, is directed to serve a copy of this order to show cause upon the parties or their attorneys, and upon the appellant, by regular mail.MATTER of Eliyahu C. Poltorak, respondent- ap, v. Bella Poltorak, appellant-res — (Proceeding No. 1)MATTER of Bella Poltorak, ap, v. Eliyahu C. Poltorak, res — (Proceeding No. 2) V-12525-17, V-24393-17, V-26509-17) — Appeals by Bella Poltorak from three orders of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 19, 2017, September 20, 2017, and October 11, 2017, respectively, and cross appeal by Eliyahu C. Poltorak from the order dated September 20, 2017. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated December 12, 2017, the respondent-appellant was directed to file one of the following in the office of the Clerk of this Court, within 30 days after the date of the order:(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceedings to be transcribed for the cross 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 respondent-appellant was indigent and could not afford to obtain the minutes or perfect the cross appeal, a motion in this Court for leave to prosecute the cross 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 cross appeal.The respondent-appellant has failed to comply with the decision and order on motion of this Court dated December 12, 2017. Pursuant to §670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it isORDERED that the parties are directed to show cause before this Court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the cross appeal in the above-entitled proceedings for failure to comply with the decision and order on motion of this Court dated December 12, 2017, 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 February 23, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court, or her designee, is directed to serve a copy of this order to show cause upon the parties by regular mail.MATTER of Roberta Lebowitz, res, v. Howard R. Lebowitz, ap — (Proceeding No. 1)MATTER of Howard R. Lebowitz, ap, v. Roberta Lebowitz, res — (Proceeding No. 2) — Appeal by Howard R. Lebowitz from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated October 2, 2017. By   dated December 14, 2017, 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  :(1) an affidavit or affirmation stating that there were no minutes of the Family Court proceedings 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) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal.The appellant has failed to comply with the  . Pursuant to §670.4(a)(5) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][5]), it isORDERED that the parties 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 proceedings for failure to comply with the   dated December 14, 2017, 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 February 23, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court, or her designee, is directed to serve a copy of this order to show cause upon the parties by regular mail.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.MATTER of Madelyn Cano, ap, v. Leroy Bussey, Jr., res — Appeal by Madelyn Cano from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated January 22, 2018. Pursuant to Family Court Act §§1118 and 1120, and upon the certification of Maria Joy Frank, Esq., dated January 22, 2018, it isORDERED that the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:Maria Joy Frank, Esq.2648 Windmill DriveYorktown Heights, NY 10598ORDERED that the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the briefs of the appellant, the respondent, and the attorney for the child, if any. The parties are directed to file nine copies of their respective briefs and to serve one copy on each other (22 NYCRR 670.9[d][1][ii]; Family Ct Act §1116); and it is further,ORDERED that the stenographer(s) and/or the transcription service(s) is/are required promptly to make and certify two transcripts of the proceedings, if any, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (22 NYCRR 671.9); in the case of stenographers, both transcripts shall be filed with the clerk of the Family Court, and the clerk of the Family Court shall furnish one of such certified transcripts to the appellant’s counsel, without charge; in the case of transcription services, one transcript shall be filed with the clerk of the Family Court and one transcript shall be delivered to the assigned counsel. Assigned counsel is directed to provide copies of said transcripts to all of the other parties to the appeal, including the attorney for the child, if any, when counsel serves the appellant’s brief upon those parties; and it is further,ORDERED that assigned counsel shall 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 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  ; and it is further,ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this 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 transcripts have been received, and indicating the date received; or(3) if the transcripts have not been received, an affidavit or affirmation stating that this order has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken, the date thereof, and the date by which the transcripts are 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  , the Clerk of this Court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.MATTER of Delmar Moore, ap, v. Charity Abban, res — Appeal by Delmar Moore from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated December 11, 2017. Pursuant to §670.4(a) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it isORDERED 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, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this  ; and it is further,ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this  , 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 of the Family Court proceedings 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 and paid for, 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 actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above has been taken within 30 days of the date of this  , the Clerk of this Court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.MATTER of T. N. (Anoymous). Rockland County Department of Social Services, petitioner-res, Alec N. (Anoymous), res-res — Appeal by Alec N. from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County, dated December 15, 2017. Pursuant to §670.4(a) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), it isORDERED that the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding shall be perfected within 60 days after the receipt by the respondent-appellant of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and the respondent-appellant shall notify this Court by letter of the date the transcripts are received, or, if there are no minutes of proceedings to be transcribed, within 60 days of the date of this  ; and it is further,ORDERED that within 30 days after the date of this  , the respondent-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 of the Family Court proceedings 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 and paid for, the date thereof and the date by which the transcript is expected; or(4) if the respondent-appellant is indigent and cannot 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. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from the respondent-appellant, stating either that he or she qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his or her financial status has not changed since that time, or that he or she had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his or her assets and income; or(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal; and it is further,ORDERED that if none of the actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above has been taken within 30 days of the date of this  , the Clerk of this Court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.By Rivera, J.P.; Miller, Hinds-Radix and Maltese, JJ.Frances Positano, res, v. Sun Star Industries Corporation, et al., ap — Motion by the appellants to stay the trial in the above-entitled action pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 2, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is denied.RIVERA, J.P., MILLER, HINDS-RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur.By Rivera, J.P.; Miller, Hinds-Radix and Maltese, JJ.MATTER of Frank Moore, Jr., deceased. Eileen Kyne, petitioner-appellant; Michele Moore, objectant-appellant; Frank Moore III, res-res — (File No. 754/90) — Motion by the objectant-appellant to stay all proceedings in the above-entitled proceeding pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Suffolk County, dated January 31, 2017, 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 isORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to stay all proceedings is denied; and it is further,ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to perfect the appeal is granted, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.RIVERA, J.P., MILLER, HINDS-RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur.MATTER of GSM LI, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.By Rivera, J.P.; Miller, Hinds-Radix and Maltese, JJ.MATTER of Travon Hylton, res, v. Deandra Nereida Delvalle, ap — Motion by counsel assigned to prosecute an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated August 23, 2016, in effect, to be relieved of the assignment on the ground that no appeal lies from an order entered upon the default of the appealing party.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that on the Court’s own motion, the parties 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 on the ground that no appeal lies from an order entered upon the default of the appealing party (see CPLR 5511), 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 February 23, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion by the appellant’s assigned counsel is held in abeyance in the interim; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court, or her designee, is directed to serve a copy of this order to show cause upon the parties by regular mail.RIVERA, J.P., MILLER, HINDS-RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur.MATTER of 136 Northern Blvd., LLC, res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of 320 Buffalo, LLC, res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of 385 Bayview, LLC, etc., res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.By Rivera, J.P.; Miller, Hinds-Radix and Maltese, JJ.MATTER of Amy Dunne, ap, v. Michael S. Yarus, res — Appeal by Amy Dunne from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County, dated May 1, 2017. By order to show cause dated December 19, 2017, the parties 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 decision and order on motion of this Court dated November 2, 2017, issued pursuant to §670.4(a)(2) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a][2]).Now, upon the order to show cause and the papers filed in response thereto, it isORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to §670.4(a) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), within 30 days of the date of this decision and order on motion, 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 of 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 and paid for, 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 the appellant fails to file the affidavit or affirmation within 30 days of the date of this decision and order on motion, the Court will dismiss the appeal, without further notice.RIVERA, J.P., MILLER, HINDS-RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur.MATTER of 525 Chestnut, L.P., res, v. Department of Assessment ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of 641 Hempstead Gardens Drive, Inc., res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.By Leventhal, J.PEOPLE, etc., plf, v. Luis Sarante, def — 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 September 13, 2017, 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 isORDERED that the application is denied.MATTER of 5120 Private, LLC, res, v. Department of Assessment ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.By Roman, J.PEOPLE, etc., res, GRANTING LEAVE TO APPEAL v. Jose Baez, ap — 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 Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 15, 2017, 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 isORDERED that the application is granted; the defendant is granted leave to appeal from the order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 15, 2017, 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.MATTER of AML Realty, LLC, res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of AC I Shore Road, LLC, res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of 585 Merrick Road, LLC, res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM 270-280, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM 270-280, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM 290, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM LI, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM LI, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of Glenridge United, LLC, res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of Michael Ostreicher res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM 119, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of Family Aides, Inc., res, v. Department of Assessment ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.Andrea L. Ayers, ap, v. City of Mount Vernon, res — Application by the appellant 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, Westchester County, dated April 3, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted, the appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged, the reply brief submitted to the Clerk of the Court is accepted for filing and deemed timely served.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.MATTER of Genella Lintao, ap, v. Richard Delgado, res — Appeal by Genella Lintao from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated August 17, 2017.On the Court’s own motion, it isORDERED that pursuant to Family Court Act §1120, the following named attorney is assigned as attorney for the child:Janis A. Parazzelli, Esq.99 Tulip Avenue Suite 405Floral Park, NY 11001516-358-1409and it is further,ORDERED that the time for the attorney for the child to serve and file a brief is enlarged until March 5, 2018, and the brief of the attorney for the child shall be served and filed on or before that date.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.MATTER of BS Central, LLC, res, v. Department of Assessment ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM LI, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM LI, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM LI, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM John, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM LI, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment, et al., ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of GSM LI, LLC res, v. Department of Assessment ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 30, 2015.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.American Lending Corp., ap, v. Dana Grigg def-res, Gary F. Smith, defendant third-party plaintiff-res, Antonietta Russo, third-party def-res — Application on appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated April 4, 2017, and two judgments of the same court dated April 19, 2017, and July 3, 2017, respectively, to withdraw the appeals insofar as taken against the defendant third-party plaintiff-respondent.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeals are marked withdrawn insofar as taken against the defendant third-party plaintiff-respondent.Zafar Iqbal ap, v. 25 Street, LLC res — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 21, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.Victoria Gribbin, res, v. William J. Gribbin, ap — Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 25, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.Congregation Talmud Torah Ohev Sholom R. Morris Kevelson, res, v. Abraham Sorscher ap — Application by the appellants Liberty Hall Church of God, Inc., and Evangelical Christian Credit Union to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated August 15, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal by the appellants Liberty Hall Church of God, Inc., and Evangelical Christian Credit Union is marked withdrawn.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.Susan Johnson res-ap, v. Toniann DeSantos appellants-res — Application by the respondents-appellants on an appeal and a cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated August 11, 2017, for leave to withdraw the cross appeal.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the cross appeal is deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Deshawn Posey, ap — Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered February 8, 2017.Upon the stipulation of the appellant and the attorneys for the respective parties to the appeal dated December 29, 2017, it isORDERED that the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of High Point Safety and Application to Withdraw Appeal Casualty Insurance Company v. Timothy L. Davis, res — Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated August 14, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeal is marked withdrawn.MATTER of Rising Tide Fuel, LLC., ap, v. Robert Bambino, etc., res — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until March 1, 2018, to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 27, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted to the extent that the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 5, 2018, the respondent’s brief must be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.MATTER of Applications for Extensions of Time — Parties in the following causes have filed applications pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to extend the time to perfect or to serve and file a brief.Upon the papers filed in support of the applications, it isORDERED that the applications are granted and the following parties in the following causes are granted the specified extensions of time:Title Docket NumberApplicant Name(s) Extended DeadlineBank of NY Mellon v. Dieudonne2017-08956Bank of NY MellonMarch 12, 2018Boucan NYC Caf, LLC v. 467 Rogers, LLC2017-11329Boucan NYC Caf, LLCFebruary 28, 2018Bronx Acupuncture Therapy, P.C. v. Hereford Ins. Co.2017-05102Hereford Ins. Co. February 16, 2018Cenlar FSB v. Glauber2017-08068Eva GlaubnarApril 5, 2018Coriat v. Miller2017-08999Polina CoriatMarch 5, 2018Country Bank v. Heneghan2017-09454Country BankApril 3, 2018Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Yurowitz2017-00155Deutsche Bank National Trust April 4, 2018Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Heitner2016-10067Deutsche Bank National Trust CompanyMarch 30, 2018Emigrant Bank v. Wade2016-09963Emigrant BankFebruary 14, 2018Federal National Mortgage Association v. Didar2017-08548Mehadi DidarMarch 28, 2018Goshen Mortgage LLC v. Minault2017-06562Josseline MinaultRoger MinaultMarch 7, 2018HSBC Bank, USA v. Willis2016-12704 +1HSBC Bank, USAFebruary 8, 2018Harvey v. White2017-09046Alec P. WhiteHarvey WhiteApril 16, 2018LaSalle Bank, NA v. Lawrence2017-04651Wayne LawrenceFebruary 15, 2018Larcy v. Kamler2017-05115Donna LarcyFebruary 21, 2018MNH Sub I, LLC v. Callender2017-00491Carol CallenderWayne CallenderFebruary 13, 2018Matter of B. (Anonymous); Heidi2017-04173Reuven PasternakMarch 5, 2018Matter of Dedvukaj v. Shkreli2017-11800Victor DedvukajMarch 5, 2018Matter of Forte v. New York City Transit Authority2017-08139New York City Transit AuthorityMarch 12, 2018Matter of Glinka v. State University of New York at Stony Brook2017-05366State University of New York at Stony BrookStony Brook HospitalFebruary 28, 2018Matter of Harding v. Yonkers Central School District2017-09837Joseph J. HardingApril 11, 2018Matter of Hart, deceased2017-10155Estate of Clifford J. Hart a/k/a Clifford HartApril 30, 2018Matter of Universal North America Insurance Company v. City of New York2017-09366Universal North America Insurance CompanyApril 30, 2018Morson v. 5899 Realty2017-08523Marilyn MorsonMarch 5, 2018PHH Mortgage Corporation v. Duverglas2017-06512 +1Danielle DuverglasMarch 2, 2018People v. Burgos, Jose2015-05496People of State of New YorkFebruary 26, 2018People v. Escamilla, Alex 2015-09039Alex Escamilla February 16, 2018People v. Ransom, Christopher2013-09989Christopher RansomFebruary 15, 2018Stearns Bank National Association v. LoDuca2017-08842Paul A. LoDuca, Jr.March 29, 2018Stearns Bank National Association v. LoDuca2017-08843Paul A. LoDuca, Jr.March 29, 2018US Bank National Association v. Mattiello2017-06848James MattielloFebruary 13, 2018US Bank v. Hasan2017-01823 +1Yosef HasanFebruary 13, 2018Vega v. West Nostrand Realty LLC 2017-08181West Nostrand RealtyMarch 5, 2018Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Brooks 2017-08195Bati BrooksAbe Brooks March 28, 2018Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Levi2017-10047 +1Edan LeviApril 25, 2018