Appellate TermSecond DepartmentSecond, Eleventhand ThirteenthJudical DistrictsBy: Pesce, P.J., Aliotta, Elliot, JJ.2007-1912 K C. METRO MED., P.C. v. MVAIC — Appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, entered September 11, 2007, and from a so-ordered stipulation of that court dated February 19, 2008.On the court’s own motion, it isORDERED that the appeals are dismissed.The appeal from the order entered September 11, 2007 is dismissed, as the matter was settled by a so-ordered stipulation dated February 19, 2008. The appeal from the stipulation is dismissed, as no appeal lies therefrom (see CPLR 5511).January 30, 2018By: Pesce, P.J., Weston, Aliotta, JJ.2015-1842 K CR. THE PEOPLE v. CORREA, ERIC — Motion by Paul Skip Laisure, Esq., counsel assigned to represent appellant on an appeal from a judgment of conviction of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Kings County, rendered July 21, 2015, in effect, to be relieved as counsel on the ground that appellant has abandoned the appeal by failing to respond to correspondence sent to him by assigned counsel.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that appellant is directed to show cause before this court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal on the ground that he has abandoned the appeal, by filing an affirmation or an affidavit on that issue in the office of the Clerk of this court on or before February 23, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion by assigned counsel is held in abeyance in the interim; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of this court or his designee is directed to serve a copy of this order to show cause upon appellant at his last known place of residence, and upon the attorney who last appeared for him, and upon the District Attorney, by ordinary mail pursuant to CPL 470.60 (2).January 29, 2018By: Pesce, P.J., Aliotta, Elliot, JJ.2017-965 Q C. PEARSALL v. KYUNG J. CHA — On the court’s own motion, it isORDERED that so much of the above-captioned appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, entered January 30, 2017, as was purportedly taken by appellant Kyung J. Cha is dismissed, the portion of the order appealed from that denied so much of the motion giving rise to the order as was purportedly brought on behalf of appellant Kyung J. Cha is vacated, and so much of the complaint as was asserted against appellant Kyung J. Cha is dismissed.This court has received proof that appellant Kyung J. Cha died on November 10, 2007, prior to the 2008 commencement of this action. Thus, so much of the action as was against appellant Kyung J. Cha was a nullity from the inception of the action (see Gorbaty v. Brodsky, 142 AD3d 584 [2016]).January 30, 20182017-1122 Q C. ESTATE OF KITT v. REID — Appeal from a final judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, entered December 6, 2016.On the court’s own motion, it isORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.Although the final judgment recites that it was entered pursuant to a stipulation, the record indicates that it was in fact entered after an inquest. In either event, no appeal lies therefrom (see CPLR 5511).January 30, 20182017-2365 Q CR. THE PEOPLE v. HERNANDEZ, YOLANDA — Motion by defendant, pursuant to Cpl 460.30, for an extension to take an appeal from a judgment of conviction of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Queens County, rendered October 27, 2017, for leave to prosecute the appeal 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 opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the branch of the motion seeking an extension of time to take an appeal is granted and defendant’s moving papers are deemed to constitute a timely notice of appeal; and it is further,ORDERED that the branches of the motion seeking leave to prosecute the appeal as a poor person and the assignment of counsel are granted and the Legal Aid Society is assigned as counsel; and it is further,ORDERED, on the court’s own motion, that the appeal shall be perfected expeditiously; and it is further,ORDERED that the court stenographer, if any, shall promptly make, certify and file two typewritten transcripts of the minutes of all proceedings, if any, with the clerk of the trial court, who is directed to furnish without charge one copy to the attorney who is now assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal and to file the second copy of the transcript, if any, with the record, which shall then be filed with this court; and it is further,ORDERED that assigned counsel shall serve a copy of the transcript, if any, upon the District Attorney, same to be returned upon argument or submission of the appeal; and 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, if any, prepared in connection with defendant’s sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on defendant which are incorporated or referred to in the report.January 29, 20182017-2434 K C. PIERRE J. RENELIQUE, M.D., P.C. v. AMERICAN IND. INS. CO. — Motion by appellant for a stay pending the determination of an appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, entered November 29, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted on condition the appeal be perfected by May 4, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that in the event the appeal is not perfected on or before May 4, 2018, the court, on its own motion, may vacate the stay, or respondent may move to vacate the stay on three days’ notice, and may serve such application in person.January 30, 20182017-2435 K C. ACTIVE CARE MED. SUPPLY CORP. v. AMERICAN IND. INS. CO. — Motion by appellant for a stay pending the determination of an appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, entered November 29, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted on condition the appeal be perfected by May 4, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that in the event the appeal is not perfected on or before May 4, 2018, the court, on its own motion, may vacate the stay, or respondent may move to vacate the stay on three days’ notice, and may serve such application in person.January 30, 2018Ninth and TenthJudical DisTRICTSBy: Garguilo, J.P., Tolbert, Ruderman, JJ.2016-643 S C. RHINO RECOVERY, INC. v. RIZZUTO — Motion by appellant for leave to reargue consolidated appeals from orders of the District Court of Suffolk County, Third District, dated February 11, 2016 and April 21, 2016, respectively, which were determined by decision and order of this court dated October 26, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is denied.January 30, 2018By: Marano, P.J., Tolbert, Garguilo, JJ.2017-1272 S CR. THE PEOPLE v. HERNANDEZ, JOSE A. — Motion by appellant on an appeal from a judgment of conviction of the District Court of Suffolk County, Suffolk County Traffic and Parking Violations Agency, rendered November 10, 2016, to disqualify Traffic Prosecutor Justin W. Smiloff, the Office of the Suffolk County Attorney and the Prosecutor’s Office for the Suffolk County Traffic and Parking Violations Agency from appearing on behalf of respondent on the appeal.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is denied.January 29, 2018By: Marano, P.J.2017-1492 RO CR. THE PEOPLE v. DISCENZA, RONALD — Motion by defendant for leave to reargue his prior application pursuant to CPL 450.15 and 460.15 for a certificate granting leave to appeal to this court from an order of the Justice Court of the Town of Clarkstown, Rockland County, entered July 19, 2017, which was determined by me in a decision and order on application dated September 5, 2017, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Appellate Division from the September 5, 2017 decision and order on application.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the branch of the motion seeking leave to reargue is granted and, upon reargument, the determination in the decision and order on application dated September 5, 2017 is adhered to; and it is further,ORDERED that the branch of the motion seeking leave to appeal to the Appellate Division is denied.January 29, 2018
