MATTER of Tristan G. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, Child Protective Services, appellant-res, Christina G. (Anonymous), res-res — Hortensia L. (Anonymous), pet-res — Appeals by Suffolk County Department of Social Services, Child Protective Services, and cross appeals by Christina G., from two orders of the Family Court, Suffolk County, both dated November 17, 2016. By letter dated February 17, 2017, the attorney for Hortensia L. advised the Court that Christina G. had died, and by letter dated January 26, 2018, the attorney for the child provided a copy of the death certificate for Christina G. which stated that she had died on January 31, 2017.Now, 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 dismissing the appeals and cross appeals in the above-entitled proceedings on the ground that they have been rendered academic by the death of Christina G. (see Matter of Charles C. E., 129 AD3d 721), 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 26, 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, and upon the former attorney for Christina G., by regular mail.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Rivera, J.P.; Miller, Nelson and Iannacci, JJ.Scott R. McLucas, res, v. Hope A. McLucas, ap — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a decision and order (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated June 5, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the parties are directed to show cause why the appeals should or should not be dismissed on the ground that no appeal lies from a decision (see Schicchi v. J.A. Green Constr. Co., 100 AD2d 509), and that no appeal lies as of right from an order that is not the result of a motion made on notice, and leave to appeal has not been granted (see CPLR 5701), by filing an affirmation or affidavit on that issue with the Clerk of this Court on or before February 28, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that the application is held in abeyance in the interim; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court, or her designee, shall serve a copy of this order to show cause on the parties by regular mail.RIVERA, J.P., MILLER, BRATHWAITE NELSON and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.Edward Kelley, etc. res, v. Aruna Garuda, etc. def, Nikhit Gupta, etc., defendant-appellant; International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. nonparty-ap — Application on appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated October 2, 2017, and an appeal from a judgment of the same court entered October 31, 2017, to withdraw the appeal from the order dated October 2, 2017, insofar as taken by International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., Congregation of the Temple Operated by International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., and Benjamin Berwing.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 International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., Congregation of the Temple Operated by International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., and Benjamin Berwing from the order dated October 2, 2017, is marked withdrawn.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Dillon, Hinds-Radix and Christopher, JJ.Michael Naughton, etc. ap, v. Duval H. Naughton, Jr. res — Motion by Stephen C. Silverberg, PLLC, inter alia, for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellants on an appeal from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 25, 2012, and to extend the appellants’ time to file papers in connection with a pending motion by the respondent Duval H. Naughton, Jr., inter alia, for leave to reargue a prior motion.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 for leave to withdraw as counsel is denied; and it is further,ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to extend the appellants’ time to file papers in connection with a pending motion by the respondent Duval H. Naughton, Jr., inter alia, for leave to reargue a prior motion, is granted, and the appellants’ time to respond to the pending motion by the respondent Duval H. Naughton, Jr., is extended until February 22, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied.SCHEINKMAN, P.J., DILLON, HINDS-RADIX and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Scheinkman, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., plf, v. Binod Singh, res, New York State Division of Parole, nonparty-ap — Application by the nonparty-appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 25, 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 on the Court’s own motion, the nonparty-appellant is directed to show cause before this Court why the appeal should not be dismissed on the ground that the order dated May 25, 2017, is neither appealable as of right nor by permission (see CPL 450.10, 450.20), by filing an affirmation or an affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this Court on or before March 8, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that the application 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 ordinary mail pursuant to CPL 470.60(2).SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.MATTER of Jamwantie Singh, petitioner- cross res, v. New York Division of Human Rights, respondent-cross pet, Petulah Gittens, etc., res — Application by the petitioner-cross respondent, and separate application by the respondent-cross petitioner, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time to perfect a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, which was transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 2, 2017.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 applications are granted, the petitioner-cross respondent’s time to perfect the proceeding is enlarged until March 2, 2018, the joint record or appendix and the petitioner-cross respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that the respondent-cross petitioner shall serve and file its answering brief, including its points of argument on the cross petition, in accordance with the rules of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]).By Dillon, J.P.; Austin, Miller and Hinds-Radix, JJ.Edward Kelley, etc. et al., res, v. Aruna Garuda def, Nikhil Gupta, etc., defendant-appellant; International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., et al., nonparty-ap — Motion by the respondents for a preference in the calendaring of an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered October 31, 2017, and appeals from an order of the same court entered October 3, 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 denied.DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and HINDS-RADIX, JJ., concur.By Dillon, J.P.; Hinds-Radix, Maltese and Lasalle, JJ.Taliyah Taylor, ap, v. State of New York, res — (Claim No. 124559) — Motion by the appellant pro se to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims dated November 30, 2016, and to waive the filing fee. Separate motion by the appellant pro se to waive compliance with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 670.10.2(f) regarding certification of the record or appendix on appeal.Upon the papers filed in support of the motions and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED 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 April 2, 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; and it is further,ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to waive the filing fee is denied; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion to waive compliance with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 670.10.2(f) regarding certification of the record or appendix on appeal is denied with leave to renew by a motion made simultaneously with the perfection of the appeal.DILLON, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, MALTESE and LASALLE, JJ., concur.By Roman, J.P.; Lasalle, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co., N.A., etc., res, v. Hamilton Pinto defendants; Hampton Dream Properties, LLC, nonparty- ap — Motion by the respondent to dismiss appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, both dated November 3, 2016, 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 Leventhal, J.P.Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, res, v. Merton Fenderson, appellant def — Motion by the respondent to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered January 12, 2017, 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 appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[e]).LEVENTHAL, J.P., COHEN, MALTESE and BARROS, JJ., concur.— JEFFREY A. COHENJOSEPH J. MALTESEBETSY BARROS, JJ.
