Marcelle B. Bichotte, plf-res, v. Ricardo O. Dunner, appellant; New York City Human Resources Administration, nonparty-res — Motion by the appellant on appeals from five orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 16, 2014, April 27, 2015, August 17, 2015 (two orders), and August 21, 2015, respectively, which were dismissed by a decision and order on motion of this Court dated August 22, 2017, on the ground that the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated upon entry of a judgment in the above-entitled action dated March 16, 2017, “to [r]enew” the decision and order dated August 22, 2017, to “[v]acat[e] the alleged [n]otice [o]f [e]ntry of [j]udgement because of deficient notice,” and to waive the motion filing fee.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the cross motion, and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to waive the motion filing fee is denied as academic as the motion filing fee was paid; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied; and it is further,ORDERED that on the Court’s own motion, the parties are directed to show cause why an order should or should not be made and entered imposing sanctions and/or costs, if any, including appellate counsel fees, against the appellant, Ricardo O. Dunner, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1(c) as this Court may deem appropriate, by filing in the office of the Clerk of this Court an original and four copies of their respective affirmations or affidavits on those issues, including the amounts of legal fees incurred by the plaintiff-respondent in opposing the above-referenced motion, and by serving one copy of the affirmations or affidavits on each other, on or before January 12, 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.The arguments raised in the appellant’s motion appear to be “completely without merit in law and cannot be supported by a reasonable argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law,” and “undertaken primarily to delay or prolong the litigation or to harass” the plaintiff-respondent (22 NYCRR 130-1.1[c]). Thus, the imposition of sanctions may be appropriate for the making of the motion (see Cardinal Holdings, Ltd. v. Indotronix Intl. Corp., 73 AD3d 960, 963; Tri-State Consumer, Inc. v. Mintz & Gold, LLP, 45 AD3d 575, 576-577). Therefore, counsel for the respective parties are directed to submit affirmations or affidavits on the issue of whether, and in what amount, costs or sanctions should or should not be imposed on the appellant, including the amounts of the legal fees incurred by the plaintiff-respondent in connection with the above-referenced motion (see Tri-State Consumer, Inc. v. Mintz & Gold, LLP, 45 AD3d at 577).RIVERA, J.P., CHAMBERS, MILLER and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. John Hymes, ap — Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered August 15, 2017, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted; 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 pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant’s counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); 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 in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; 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 prepared in connection with the appellant’s sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the appellant which are incorporated in or referred to in the report, and to provide additional copies to this Court upon demand; and it is further,ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the Court and the District Attorney’s office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to County Law §722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq.The Legal Aid Society199 Water Street – 5th FloorNew York, New York 10038and 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 or her 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 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.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Luis Blanco, ap — Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered May 31, 2016, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted; 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 pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant’s counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); 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 in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; 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 prepared in connection with the appellant’s sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the appellant which are incorporated in or referred to in the report, and to provide additional copies to this Court upon demand; and it is further,ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the Court and the District Attorney’s office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to County Law §722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:Craig Leeds, Esq.350 5th Avenue, Suite 5901New York, NY 10118212-736-2870and 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 or her 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 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.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Mastro, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Duffy, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Menelik Farrar, ap — Appeal by Menelik Farrar from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, rendered September 21, 2016. Assigned counsel submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v. California (386 US 738), in which he moved for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant. By order to show cause dated September 12, 2017, the appellant was 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 the appellant had absconded and was no longer available to comply with the mandate of the Court, and assigned counsel’s motion pursuant to Anders v. California (386 US 738) was held in abeyance in the interim.Now, upon the order to show cause and the papers filed in response thereto, it isORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal is granted, and the appeal is dismissed (see People v. Taveras, 10 NY3d 227); and it is further,ORDERED that assigned counsel’s motion pursuant to Anders v. California (386 US 738) is denied as academic.MASTRO, J.P., HALL, SGROI and DUFFY, JJ., concur.By Rivera, J.P.; Austin, Lasalle and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ.Bargil Associates, LLC, res, v. Elsa Crites, as personal representative of the estate of Ray Crites, ap — (Appeal No. 1) — 2017-02283Bargil Associates, LLC, appellant,v Elsa Crites, as personal representativeof the estate of Ray Crites, respondent.(Index No. 17522/08)(Appeal No. 2)Motion by Bargil Associates, LLC, on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 13, 2016, and February 7, 2017, respectively, for leave to renew and reargue its prior motion for a preference in the calendaring of appeals, which was determined by decision and order on motion of this Court dated July 21, 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.RIVERA, J.P., AUSTIN, LASALLE and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.By Eng, P.J.; Duffy, Connolly and Christopher, JJ.Westchase Residential Assets, LLC, res, v. June Lazzinnaro, ap — Motion by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated October 5, 2016, and for an award of costs. Cross motion by the respondent to hold in abeyance appeals from the order dated October 5, 2016, as well as from an order of the same court dated September 15, 2017, pending determination of a motion pending in the Supreme Court, Nassau County, and/or to consolidate the appeals.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the cross motion, and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to withdraw the appeal from the order dated October 5, 2016, is granted and that appeal is marked withdrawn, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied; and it is further,ORDERED that the branch of the cross motion which is to consolidate the appeals is denied as academic; and it is further,ORDERED that the cross motion is otherwise denied.ENG, P.J., DUFFY, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.William Fuessel, res, v. Jerry Chin, et al., def, Good Samaritan Hospital Medical Center, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated December 5, 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, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 16, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Michael Grasso and Linda Grasso, as co-administrators of the estate of I. G., res-ap, v. Nassau County, def, Nassau County Police Department, et al., res, Nassau University Medical Center, a division of NuHealth System appellants-res — Application by the respondents-appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 24, 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 applicants’ time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 2, 2018, and the applicants’ brief, including the points of argument on the cross appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]), shall be served and filed on or before that date.Ditmid Holdings, LLC, res, v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, as purchaser of the loans and other assets of Washington Mutual Bank, FA, etc., ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 26, 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 respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 27, 2017, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.MATTER of Yolande Watson, pet, v. New York State Office of Children and Family Services, res — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) 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 an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 16, 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, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 29, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Brian Chambers, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, rendered August 22, 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, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 27, 2017, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.By Chambers, J.P.; Miller, Hinds-Radix and Lasalle, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. James Carter, ap — Motion by the appellant for leave to reargue an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered August 12, 2013, which was determined by decision and order of this Court dated July 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.CHAMBERS, J.P., MILLER, HINDS-RADIX and LASALLE, JJ., concur.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.MATTER of Jasir M. (Anonymous). Administration for Childrens Services, petitioner-res, Myaisha E. (Anonymous), res-ap, Jason James M. (Anonymous), res-res — (Proceeding No. 1)MATTER of Jason M. (Anonymous). Administration for Childrens Services, petitioner-res, Myaisha E. (Anonymous), res-ap, Jason James M. (Anonymous), res-res — (Proceeding No. 2)MATTER of Jayla E. (Anonymous). Administration for Childrens Services, petitioner-res, Myaisha E. (Anonymous), res-ap, Jason James M. (Anonymous), res-res — (Proceeding No. 3) — Appeal by Myaisha E. from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated August 9, 2016. Pursuant to Family Court Act §§1118 and 1120, and upon the certification of Tania Schrag, Esq., dated October 27, 2017, 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:David Laniado, Esq.411 Westminster Rd. – Suite 2Cedarhurst, NY 11516516-599-8999and it is further,ORDERED that assigned counsel shall promptly attempt to contact the appellant at the address provided by the Court, and on or before December 26, 2017, shall notify the Case Manager assigned to the appeal, in writing, that he has done so and that either(1) the appellant is interested in prosecuting the appeal, or(2) the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal, or that he has been unable to contact the appellant, and wishes to be relieved of the assignment; 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 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 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 children, if any, when counsel serves the appellant’s brief upon those parties; and it is further,ORDERED that the assigned counsel shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with any or orders issued pursuant to §670.4(a) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]); and it is further,ORDERED that upon a determination that the appellant is interested in proceeding with the appeal, the assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.HSBC Bank, USA, National Association, as trustee for the holders of the Ellington Loan Acquisition Trust 2007-1, etc., res, v. Vishnu Sawh, appellant def — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until January 5, 2018, to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered November 4, 2016Upon 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 December 26, 2017, the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Jose Cotto, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until January 5, 2018, to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgement of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, rendered March 17, 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 respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 5, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Irina Hockenjos ap, v. Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, res — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 22, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 25, 2018, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Argo Paumere, res, v. John Hockenjos ap — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 22, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 1, 2018, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Onewest Bank, FSB, ap, v. Adam Jach, respondent def — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until January 30, 2018, to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated February 16, 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 January 22, 2018, the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.MATTER of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, pet-res, v. Christina Pierre Louis respondents-res, American Independent Insurance Company, ap — Application by respondent Liberty Mutual Insurance Company pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 28, 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 applicant’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 22, 2018, the applicant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.MATTER of Dorothy K. F. (Anonymous). Michael F. (Anonymous), petitioner-res, Stephanie F. (Anonymous), res-res — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered February 28, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted to the extent that the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 27, 2017, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Scott Grodsky, res, v. Francine J. Moore, appellant def — Application by the 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 April 10, 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 perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 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.441 Grand Realty Group, LLC, res, v. Two by Two Child Care and Consulting, LLC ap — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 90-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 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 to the extent that the appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 29, 2017, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Greystone Staffing, Inc., ap, v. Green Key, LLC, etc. res — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered April 10, 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 appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 1, 2018, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.By Leventhal, J.P.; Hinds-Radix, Lasalle and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ.MATTER of Eliyahu C. Poltorak, res, v. Bella Poltorak, ap — V-12525-17) — 2017-10982MATTER of Bella Poltorak, appellant,v Eliyahu C. Poltorak, respondent.(Docket No. V-26509)Motion by Bella Poltorak, inter alia, for leave to appeal to this Court from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated October 11, 2017, to stay enforcement of that order pending hearing and determination of the appeal, for leave to prosecute that appeal as a poor person, to hold Eliyahu C. Poltorak in contempt pursuant to Judiciary Law §§750 and 753 for his willful refusal to obey, and for his continued disobedience of, a decision and order on motion of this Court dated September 25, 2017, which stayed enforcement of an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 19, 2017, as well as stated portions of an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated September 20, 2017, pending hearing and determination of appeals from those orders or issuance of a dispositional order in the above-entitled proceedings, whichever occurred first, and to consolidate the appeals from the order dated October 11, 2017, with the appeals from the orders dated September 19, 2017, and September 20, 2017. Separate motion by Eliyahu C. Poltorak for leave to cross-appeal to this Court from the order dated September 20, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of motion by Bella Poltorak and the papers filed in opposition and in relation thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the motion by Eliyahu C. Poltorak and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the branch of the motion by Bella Poltorak which is for leave to appeal from the order dated October 11, 2017, is denied as unnecessary as that order is appealable as of right (see Family Ct Act §1112); and it is further,ORDERED that the branches of the motion which is for leave to prosecute the appeal from the order dated October 11, 2017, as poor person relief and to consolidate the appeals are granted; 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 with respect to the appeal from the order dated October 11, 2017, 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 counsel for Bella Poltorak, New York Legal Assistance Group, 7 Hanover Square, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10004, (212)613-5086, 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 counsel for Bella Poltorak. Counsel is directed to provide copies of said transcripts to all of the other parties when counsel serves a brief upon those parties; and it is further,ORDERED that the counsel for Bella Poltorak is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the clerk of Family Court, Kings County; and it is further,ORDERED that the branch of the motion by Bella Poltorak which is to hold Eliyahu C. Poltorak in contempt pursuant to Judiciary Law §§750 and 753 is held in abeyance and the matter is referred to the Family Court, Kings County, to hear and report on (1) whether Eliyahu C. Poltorak willfully violated the decision and order on motion of this Court dated September 25, 2017, (2) whether Eliyahu C. Poltorak knowingly disobeyed the decision and order on motion of this Court dated September 25, 2017, and, in so doing, defeated, impaired, or prejudiced the rights of Bella Poltorak, and (3) whether Eliyahu C. Poltorak has a defense to a finding of contempt or any evidence bearing on sanctions, in the event a finding of contempt is warranted; the Family Court, Kings County, shall file its report with all convenient speed; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion by Bella Poltorak is otherwise denied; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to §670.4(a) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), Bella Poltorak shall perfect the appeal from the order dated October 11, 2017, within 60 days after the receipt of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and 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 decision and order on motion; 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 after the date of this decision and order on motion, Bella Poltorak 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 from the order dated October 11, 2017; 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 this decision and order on motion has been served upon the clerk of the Family Court, Kings County, the date thereof, and the date by which the transcript is expected; or(4) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the appeal from the order dated October 11, 2017; and it is further,ORDERED that if Bella Poltorak takes none of the actions described in (1), (2), (3), or (4) above within 30 days of the date of this , the Clerk of the Court shall issue an order to all parties to show cause why the appeal from the order dated October 11, 2017, should or should not be dismissed; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion by Eliyahu C. Poltorak is granted; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to §670.4(a) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), Eliyahu C. Poltorak shall perfect the cross appeal from the order dated September 20, 2017, within 60 days after the receipt of the transcripts of the minutes of the proceedings in the Family Court, and 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 decision and order on motion; 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 after the date of this decision and order on motion, Eliyahu C. Poltorak 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 cross appeal from the order dated September 20, 2017; or(2) if there are such minutes, an affidavit or affirmation that stating 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 the transcript has been ordered and paid for, the date thereof, and the date by which the transcript is expected; or(4) if he is indigent and cannot 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. Such a motion must be supported by an affidavit from Eliyahu C. Poltorak, stating either that he qualified for assigned counsel upon application to the Family Court and that his financial status has not changed since that time, or that he had retained counsel or appeared pro se in the Family Court, and listing his assets and income; or(5) an affidavit or an affirmation withdrawing the cross appeal from the order dated September 20, 2017; and it is further,ORDERED that if Eliyahu C. Poltorak takes none of the actions described in (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above within 30 days of the date of this , the Clerk of the Court shall issue an order to all parties to show cause why the cross appeal from the order dated September 20, 2017, should or should not be dismissed.LEVENTHAL, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, LASALLE and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.Woodstone Builders, Inc., ap, v. Francine Picudella, res — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated March 17, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted to the extent that the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 29, 2017, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.VNB New York, LLC, res, v. Ashley Raghoo appellants def — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both dated February 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, the appellants’ time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until January 12, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeals and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Victoria Valle, res, v. St. Brigids Roman Catholic Church, ap — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 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 perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 29, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Andrew Spodek, etc. plf-res, et al., plf, v. Charles Neiss ap, Moses Fried defendants-respondents def — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 28, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 26, 2017, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Andrew H. Spodek, etc. plaintiffs- respondents plf, v. Charles Neiss, etc. ap, Moses Fried defendants-respondents def — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 28, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 26, 2017, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Andrew H. Spodek, etc. plaintiffs- respondents plf, v. Charles Neiss, etc. ap, Moses Fried defendants-respondents def — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 28, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 26, 2017, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Ruth Poshnansky ap, v. 5023 15th Avenue Associates, LLC, respondents def — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 17, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until March 23, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Andrew H. Spodek, etc. plaintiffs- respondents plf, v. Charles Neiss, etc. ap, Moses Fried defendants-respondents def — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 28, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 26, 2017, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Joseph Pasqualoni, ap, v. Jacklou Corp., doing business as Star Diner, res — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated May 16, 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 perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 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.Christine McDonald, res, v. Pllumb Bajraktari, ap — Application by the 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 March 22, 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 perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 6, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.MATTER of Michael W. McDevitt, ap, v. Suffolk County res — Application by the 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 5, 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 perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 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.Dutch Wilson, res, v. Mickeys Rides N More, Inc. ap, et al., def — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated May 15, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 29, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Lois Sacks, plf-res, v. Knolls at Pinewood, LLC def-res, Jason Farina, etc., appellant def — Application by plaintiff-respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated July 22, 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, the applicant’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 29, 2018, and the applicant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Derek Mackey, ap, v. Nicole Kelly Pub, Inc. respondents def — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 1, 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 perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 11, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.US Bank National Association, as trustee under pooling and servicing agreement dated as of August 1, 2007, Master Asset-Backed Securities Trust 2007-HE2 Mortgage Pass-through Certificates, Series 2007-HE2, res, v. Garfield McPherson, appellant def — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, both dated February 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, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until December 27, 2017, and the record or appendix on the appeals and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.HSBC Bank USA, N.A., plf, v. Mohammed Nasim, appellant defendants; Federal National Mortgage Association, nonparty-res — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated April 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 the application is granted, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 14, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Nazela Singh, plf-res, v. Mohabir Sukhu def-res, DNJC Contracting, Inc. ap — Application by the plaintiff-respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated February 6, 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 plaintiff-respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 5, 2018, and the plaintiff-respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Kaplanlar Technology Group, res, v. My Group Holdings, LLC, ap — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 9, 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 appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 27, 2017, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Randi Marcus, et al, res, v. Sonia Finn, appellant def — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 6, 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 perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 27, 2017, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.The Bank of New York Mellon, as trustee for CIT Mortgage Loan Trust 2007-1, etc., res, v. Maria Leone ap, et al., def — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 8, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 29, 2017, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., res, v. Elly C. Haylett, appellant def — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 23, 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, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 29, 2017, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee for the holders of the MASTR Adjustable Rate Mortgage Trust 2007-2, res, v. Vincent Trulli, a/k/a Vincent Trulli, Jr., appellant def — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated February 27, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted to the extent that the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 27, 2017, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Jonathan Maldonado, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until January 12, 2018, to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, rendered May 23, 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, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 12, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, res, v. Todd Dugan, appellant def — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated February 2, 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 perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 4, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Flagstar Bank, FSB, res, v. Timothy K. Hart ap, et al., def — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated August 16, 2016.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 29, 2017, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.MLB Sub I, LLC, res, v. Michael Clark, appellant def — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 9, 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 perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 24, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Cathy Cassara res, v. Brook Property Management, ap — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated April 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, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 18, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.1077 Madison Street, LLC, plf-res, v. Osbert Dickerson, ap, Washington Mutual Bank, FA def-res — Application by the plaintiff-respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 22, 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, the plaintiff-respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarge until December 29, 2017, and the plaintiff-respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.HSBC Bank USA, National Association, as trustee for the holders of the Deutsche, Alt-A Securities Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2007-1 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, ap, v. Thomas F. Grogan, et al., res — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated March 1, 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 appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 27, 2017, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Jeffrey Miller, res, v. County of Nassau ap — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered March 10, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 2, 2018, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Kethlie Joseph, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a three-week enlargement of time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered October 28, 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 to the extent that the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 28, 2017, the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.MATTER of Shahzad Gulzar, appellant- res, v. Shandy Gulzar, respondent- ap — Appeal by Shahzad Gulzar and cross appeal by Shandy Gulzar from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated August 24, 2017. Pursuant to Family Court Act §§1118 and 1120, and upon the certification of Daniel E. Lubetsky, Esq., dated December 5, 2017, it isORDERED that the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:Daniel E. Lubetsky, Esq.155-03 Jamaica Ave.Jamaica, NY 11432-3829718-264-8156/8and it is further,ORDERED that the appeal and cross appeal will be heard on the original papers (including a certified transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the briefs of the parties. 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 assigned 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, when counsel serves a brief upon those parties; and it is further,ORDERED that assigned counsel shall serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the Family Court, Queens County; and it is further,ORDERED that the assigned counsel shall perfect the appeal in the above-entitled proceeding 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 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 and cross 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 decision and order on motion has been served upon the clerk of the Family Court, Queens County, 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 the Court shall issue an order to all parties to the appeal and cross appeal to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.Daniel Ortiz, ap, v. City of New York res — Application by the respondents City of New York, The New York City Fire Department, and The Comptroller of the City of New York, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2)for a 30-day enlargement of time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 20, 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 applicants’ time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 26, 2017, the applicants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as trustee, for Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-5, res, v. Roopnaraine Sankar appellants def — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both entered January 18, 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 respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 27, 2017, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Nadira Larosa, plf-res, v. CVS Pharmacy def-res, CVS Hillside Ave., LLC defendants third-party def-res, Lawnside Realty Corporation, defendant third-party plaintiff-appellant def — Application by the defendants-respondents and the defendants third-party defendants-respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated January 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, the applicants’ time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 3, 2018, and the applicants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Yohani P. Moran, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered April 14, 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, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 3, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Keyspan Gas East Corporation, doing business as Keyspan Energy Delivery, plf, v. Supervisor of Town of North Hempstead defendants third-party plaintiffs-res, County of Nassau, et al., third-party def-ap — Application by the defendants third-party plaintiffs-respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until January 15, 2018, to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated August 17, 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, the applicants’ time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 15, 2018, and the applicants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Christian Nieto, res, v. The City of New York, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 15, 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 January 2, 2018, the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Frank Rinaldi, appellant-res, v. Wasim Wakmal, def, Utica First Insurance Company, res-ap, Progressive Casualty Insurance Company, res — Application by the respondent-appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to serve and file a brief on an appeal and a cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated December 12, 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 to the extent that the applicant’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 25, 2018, the applicant’s brief, including the points of argument on the cross appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]), shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Marcus A. Gross, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until January 9, 2018, to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered April 5, 2007.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 December 26, 2017, the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Don DiLorenzo and Lillian DiLorenzo, as co-executors of the estate of Donald DiLorenzo, res, v. Deborah DiLorenzo, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 30-day enlargement of time to serve and file a brief on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered March 11, 2016, and September 21, 2016, respectively.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted to the extent that the respondent’s time to file a brief is enlarged until December 28, 2017, the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as trustee for GSR Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-OA1, res, v. Toni Simons, appellant def — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered May 11, 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 to the extent that the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 18, 2017, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Inna Grechko, etc., ap, v. Maimonides Medical Center respondents def — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 30-day enlargement of time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 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 to the extent that the appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until December 28, 2017, the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Rebecca Geffner, individually, and as executrix of the estate of Alfred Geffner, deceased, ap, v. Mercy Medical Center, et al., respondents def — Separate applications by the respondents Associated Cardiology Consultants, P.C., Cardiology Consultants of Long Island, and Thierry Duchatellier, M.D., and the respondent Harte Placements, Inc., etc., pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 30-day enlargement of time to serve and file their respective briefs on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 8, 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 to the extent that the applicants’ time to serve and file their respective briefs is enlarged until December 28, 2017, the applicants’ respective briefs shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the applications are otherwise denied.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Frank Andolina, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until January 5, 2018, to serve and file a brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, rendered March 2, 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, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 5, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Apex Rehabilitation and Care Center, ap, v. Lorraine E. Butler, res — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 30-day enlargement of time to serve and file a reply brief on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 29, 2017, and August 9, 2017, respectively.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 appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until January 2, 2018, the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Juan Baez de la Cruz res-ap, v. Winthrop-University Hospital, res, Elmont Funeral Home Corp., appellant-res — Application pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal and a cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated June 2, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted; and it is further,ORDERED that the appellant-respondent’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until February 20, 2018, and the joint record or appendix on the appeal and cross appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][1]) and the appellant-respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,ORDERED that the respondents-appellants shall serve and file their 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]).US Bank National Association, etc., res, v. Robert P. Bochicchio, appellant def — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, both dated February 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, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 2, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Joanne Lynn, res, v. Barbara Johnston, ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 23, 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 respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 16, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Pamela Rothfeld, res, v. Mall at Smith Haven, LLC res-ap, The Brickman Group, Ltd., LLC, appellant-res — Application by the respondents-appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal and a cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated June 9, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the application and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the application is granted, the respondents-appellants’ time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 29, 2018, and the respondents-appellants’ brief, including the points of argument on the cross appeal (see 22 NYCRR 670.8[c][3]), shall be served and filed on or before that date.Wells Fargo Bank National Association, etc., res, v. Sanjay Barot, etc., appellant def — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 8, 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 January 8, 2018, the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Shanna Devito, res, v. North Bellmore Union Free School District, appellant; Bellmore-Merrick Child Care Program, third-party def-res — Application by the third-party defendant-respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated September 12, 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 applicant’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 25, 2018, the applicant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.U.S. Bank National Association, etc., res, v. Cecil Haynes, appellant def — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 26, 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 perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 29, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellant’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, res, v. Thomas R. Quinn appellants def — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a three-month enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated February 16, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 30, 2018, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.GLND 1945, LLC, res, v. Dorothy Ballard, ap — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 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, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 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.Seong Deok Choe, ap, v. Jose Sumba 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, Queens County, entered November 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, the appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until December 29, 2017, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Empire Enterprises I.J.J.A., Inc., ap, v. Daimler Buses of North America, Inc. respondents (and a third-party action). — Application by the respondents pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated November 22, 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 to the extent that the respondents’ time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 26, 2017, the respondents’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Mehroz Ahmed ap, v. New York City Board of Education, et al., res — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 20, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until January 10, 2018, the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.MATTER of Yosepha K. (Anonymous), a/k/a Chaya K. (Anonymous). Administration for Childrens Services, petitioner-res, Chana D. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant res — (Proceeding No. 1)MATTER of Rivah K. (Anonymous). Administration for Childrens Services, petitioner-res, Chana D. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant res — (Proceeding No. 2) — Appeal by Chana D. from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated May 2, 2016. Pursuant to Family Court Act §§1118 and 1120, and upon the certification of Lesli ChingSharyn M. Duncan, Esq., dated December 6, 2017, it isORDERED that pursuant to Family Court Act §1120, the following named attorney is assigned as the attorney for the child on the appeal:Ralph Carrieri, Esq.200 Old Country Road, #620Mineola, NY 11501516-248-1188and it is further,ORDERED that Lesli Ching, Esq., is directed to turn over all papers in the proceeding to the new attorney for the child herein assigned.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.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 Family Court Act §§1118 and 1120, and upon the certification of Francine J. Silverstein, Esq., dated December 5, 2017, it isORDERED that pursuant to Family Court Act §1120, the following named attorney is assigned as the attorney for the child on the appeal:Helene Chowes, Esq.401 Broadway, #203new York, NY 10013212-431-9550and it is further,ORDERED that Francine J. Silverstein, Esq., is directed to turn over all papers in the proceeding to the new attorney for the child herein assigned.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Robb Bull, ap — On the Court’s own motion, it isORDERED that the decision and order on motion of this Court dated November 3, 2017, in the above-entitled case is recalled and vacated, and the following decision and order on motion is substituted therefor:Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered August 15, 2017, as a poor person, and for the assignment of counsel.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted; 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 pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant’s counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); 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 in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; 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 prepared in connection with the appellant’s sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the appellant which are incorporated in or referred to in the report, and to provide additional copies to this Court upon demand; and it is further,ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the Court and the District Attorney’s office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to County Law §722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:Joseph DeFelice, Esq.125-10 Queens Boulevard, Suite 302Kew Gardens, NY 11415718-261-3358and 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 or her 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 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.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Rivera, J.P.; Chambers, Maltese and Barros, JJ.Anil Sehgal res, v. www.nyairportsbus.com, Inc., et al., ap — Motion by the appellants for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from a decision and order of this Court dated August 2, 2017, which determined an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered January 8, 2015.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., CHAMBERS, MALTESE and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Balkin, J.P.; Hinds-Radix, Duffy and Connolly, JJ.MATTER of Alan W. Read, pet, v. Theresa L. Egan, res — Motion by the petitioner to enlarge the time to perfect a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 which was transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated October 14, 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 petitioner’s time to perfect the proceeding is enlarged until December 26, 2017, and the record or appendix and the petitioner’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.BALKIN, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, DUFFY and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.MATTER of Nicholas D. Logan, a/k/a Nicholas D. Karapaleologou, deceased. Penelope Sue Logan, petitioner-res, Demetrios Logan, res-res — (File No. 157528) — Motion by the respondent-appellant to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on appeals from a decision and an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County, dated December 1, 2016, and February 27, 2017, respectively.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 a reply brief is enlarged until December 22, 2017, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.MATTER of Progressive Advanced Insurance Company, ap, v. New York City Transit Authority, 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, Queens County, entered February 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 granted, the appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until December 22, 2017, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.MATTER of Sequel Systems, Inc. pet-res, v. Sequel Systems, Inc. res, Khurshid Mughal, ap — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated November 2, 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 January 11, 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.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.Bank of America, NA, res, v. Mendel Pavel, etc., ap, et al., def — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings 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 appellant’s time to perfect the appeals is enlarged until January 11, 2018, and the record or appendix on the appeals 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.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.Margot Sokoloff, as administratrix of the estate of Warren Sokoloff ap, v. Jonathan Schor res — Motion by the appellants to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated June 6, 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 appeal is enlarged until January 11, 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.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Vikas Jagota, ap — The appellant’s motion to dispense with printing on an appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County, rendered April 24, 2014, was granted by decision and order on motion of this Court dated July 6, 2017. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated October 11, 2017, the following named attorney was assigned to prosecute the appeal:Kathleen V. Wells, Esq.222 North Main StreetNew City, NY 10956On the Court’s own motion, it isORDERED that counsel previously assigned to prosecute the appeal by decision and order on motion dated October 11, 2017, is relieved of the assignment and is directed to turn over all papers in this action to new counsel herein assigned; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to County Law §722 the following named attorney is assigned as new 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 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 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.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.Margot Sokoloff, as administratrix of the estate of Warren Sokoloff ap, v. Jonathan Schor res — Motion by the appellants to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated June 30, 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 appeal is enlarged until January 11, 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.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.MATTER of John Nadler ap, v. City of New York res — 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 January 26, 2016, and entered July 1, 2016, respectively.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 January 11, 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.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.MATTER of The Rock Community Church, ap, v. The Board of Assessors of Village of Old Westbury res — Motion by the petitioner to enlarge the time to perfect a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, which was transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered December 15, 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 petitioner’s time to perfect the proceeding by causing the original papers constituting the record to be filed in the office of the Clerk of this Court (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[d][2]) and by serving and filing a brief is enlarged until January 11, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.MATTER of Bishop Frank Best, ap, v. Melvina Grace, res — V-208061-15, V-208062-15) — Appeal by Bishop Frank Best from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated March 30, 2017. Pursuant to Family Court Act §§1118 and 1120, and upon the certification of Anne Serby, Esq., dated May 30, 2017, it isORDERED that pursuant to Family Court Act §1120, the following named attorney is assigned as the attorney for the children on the appeal:Tammi D. Pere, Esq.24 New York AvenueWest Hempstead, NY 11552516-426-8700and it is further,ORDERED that Anne Serby, Esq., is directed to turn over all papers in the proceeding to the new attorney for the children herein assigned.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.Vista Engineering Corporation ap, v. Everest Indemnity Insurance Company, respondent def — Motion by the respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered February 6, 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’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until January 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.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.MATTER of Shawanda P. (Anonymous). Administration for Childrens Services, petitioner- res, Elliot M. J. (Anonymous), respondent- ap — (Proceeding No. 1)MATTER of Shanika P. (Anonymous). Administration for Childrens Services, petitioner- res, Elliot M. J. (Anonymous), respondent- ap — (Proceeding No. 2) — Motion by the petitioner-respondent to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated May 12, 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 petitioner-respondent’s time to serve and file a brief on the appeal is enlarged until January 11, 2018, and the petitioner-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.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Leventhal, J.P.; Hall, Hinds-Radix and Maltese, JJ.MATTER of Maher Abdelqader, res, v. Anwar Abdelqader ap — Motion by the appellants for leave to reargue appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both entered April 6, 2015, which were determined by decision and order of this Court dated August 23, 2017, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the decision and order of this Court.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.LEVENTHAL, J.P., HALL, HINDS-RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as trustee for HSA Asset Securitization Corp. Trust 2007-NCI, res, v. Walter Heitner, Jr., appellant def — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered September 9, 2015, and for leave to perfect the appeal upon the appendix filed in a related appeal and a supplemental appendix.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 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 January 11, 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 the motion is otherwise denied.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.Ilene Mials res, v. Leila Millington def, Zsa Zsa Harewood, ap — Motion by Patrick Hayes for leave to withdraw as counsel for the respondents on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 27, 2016, and to enlarge the respondents’ time to serve and file a brief.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is granted and on or before December 27, 2017, Patrick Hayes shall serve his clients by one of the methods specified in CPLR 2103(c), with a copy of this decision and order on motion and shall file proof of such service with the Clerk of this Court; and it is further,ORDERED that no further proceedings shall be taken against the respondents, without leave of this Court, until the expiration of 30 days after service upon them of a copy of this decision and order on motion; and it is further,ORDERED that the respondents’ time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until February 26, 2018, and the respondents’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Balkin, J.P.; Maltese, Barros and Connolly, JJ.Marc Fishman, ap, v. Jennifer Solomon, res — Motion by the appellant to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated April 20, 2016, and July 27, 2016, respectively.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is denied.BALKIN, J.P., MALTESE, BARROS and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.MATTER of Martin Davis, a/k/a Morton Davidson, deceased. Theresa Padilla, petitioner-res, Roger Davis, res-res — (File No. 358812) — Motion by the respondent-appellant pro se on an appeal from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County, dated September 6, 2016, inter alia, to waive compliance with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 670.10.2(f) regarding certification of the respondent-appellant’s appendix.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 branch of the motion which is to waive compliance with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 670.10.2(f) regarding certification of the respondent-appellant’s appendix is denied as unnecessary as a waiver was granted by decision and order on motion of this Court dated December 1, 2017; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Balkin, J.P.; Maltese, Barros and Connolly, JJ.Leelanut Washiradusit, ap, v. Boonchai Athonvarangkul, res — Motion by the appellant on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered May 4, 2017, for leave to reargue the appellant’s prior motion to stay enforcement of the order, which was determined by decision and order on motion of this Court dated October 6, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is denied.BALKIN, J.P., MALTESE, BARROS and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.By Mastro, J.P.; Rivera, Roman and Sgroi, JJ.MATTER of Frans Sital, pet, v. Michael Capra, etc., res — Motion by the petitioner for leave to reargue a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a certain determination dated June 13, 2014, which was transferred to this Court by an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated August 27, 2015, which was determined by decision and judgment of this Court dated July 19, 2017.Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it isORDERED that the motion is denied.MASTRO, J.P., RIVERA, ROMAN and SGROI, JJ., concur.By Mastro, J.P.; Balkin, Sgroi and Duffy, JJ.MATTER of Joy Gartmond, res, v. Thomas Conway, ap — Motion by the appellant for leave to reargue appeals from an amended order of the Family Court, Westchester County, entered October 21, 2015, and two orders of the same court both entered May 18, 2016, which were determined by decision and order of this Court dated August 9, 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.MASTRO, J.P., BALKIN, SGROI and DUFFY, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ.Gary Butler, ap, v. State of New York, res — (Claim No. 128975) — Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from an order of the Court of Claims dated June 12, 2017, as a poor person.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 branch of the motion which is for leave to prosecute the appeal on the original papers is granted, and the appeal will be heard on the original papers (including the transcript of the proceedings, if any) and on the briefs of the parties, who 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 branches of the motion which are to waive payment of the filing fee and for free transcripts is denied.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, SGROI and BARROS, JJ., concur.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Anar Gavrilov, ap — Appeal by Anar Gavrilov from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered August 11, 2017. By order dated August 11, 2017, the Supreme Court, Kings County, granted an application pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law §380.55 for poor person relief.Now, upon the order dated August 11, 2017, it isORDERED that pursuant to County Law §722 the following named attorney is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal:Paul Skip Laisure, Esq.Appellate Advocates111 John Street – 9th FloorNew York, New York 10038and 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 pretrial hearings, of the plea of guilty or of the trial, and of the imposition of sentence in this action, except for those minutes previously transcribed and certified (see 22 NYCRR 671.9); and it is further,ORDERED that in the event that the case was tried to a conclusion before a jury, the stenographer shall also make, certify, and file two transcripts of the minutes of proceedings during jury selection; and it is further,ORDERED that the Clerk of the trial court shall furnish one certified transcript of each of the proceedings set forth above to the appellant’s counsel, without charge (see CPL 460.70); 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 in the event the stenographer has already prepared a copy of any of the minutes for a codefendant, then the Clerk of the trial court is directed to reproduce a copy thereof for assigned counsel; and it is further,ORDERED that upon service of a copy of this decision and order on application 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 appellant’s sentencing, including the recommendation sheet and any prior reports on the appellant which are incorporated in or referred to in the report, and to provide additional copies to this Court upon demand; and it is further,ORDERED that in the event an issue as to the legality, propriety, or excessiveness of the sentence is raised on appeal, or if assigned counsel cites or relies upon the probation report in a brief or motion in any other way, counsel shall provide a complete copy of such report and any attachments to the Court and the District Attorney’s office prior to the filing of such brief or motion; 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 or her 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 assigned counsel is directed to serve a copy of this decision and order on application upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Rivera, J.P.; Austin, Connolly and Iannacci, JJ.Roseann Badamo, res, v. Nicholas Bernhard, ap — Motion by the appellant to stay enforcement of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated June 2, 2017, pending hearing and determination of an appeal therefrom.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., AUSTIN, CONNOLLY and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.By Rivera, J.P.; Austin, Connolly and Iannacci, JJ.MATTER of Tuere Tene Rodriguez, ap, v. Randolph Starks, Jr., res — F-2426-17/17B) — Motion by Tuere Tene Rodriguez for leave to appeal to this Court from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated October 17, 2017, and to stay certain proceedings in the aboe-entitled matter, pending hearing and determination of 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 for leave to appeal is denied; and it is further,ORDERED that on the Court’s own motion, the appeal purportedly taken as of right is dismissed, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied as academic.RIVERA, J.P., AUSTIN, CONNOLLY and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.By Rivera, J.P.; Austin, Connolly and Iannacci, JJ.Mario Hernandez, res, v. Merchant Mutual Insurance Company, ap — Motion by the appellant, inter alia, to stay enforcement of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated October 26, 2017, pending hearing and determination of an appeal therefrom.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., AUSTIN, CONNOLLY and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.By Rivera, J.P.; Austin, Connolly and Iannacci, JJ.Bank of New York Mellon, etc., res, v. Syed Hussain, appellant def — Motion by the appellant, inter alia, to stay the foreclosure sale of the subject premises, pending hearing and determination of appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered April 6, 2016, and a judgment of the same court entered September 8, 2017, to consolidate the appeals and, in effect, to deem the record and the appellant’s brief filed in connection with the appeal from the order to be filed in connection with the appeal from the judgment and for leave to serve and file a supplemental record containing the judgment and notice of appeal from the judgment. 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 motion 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 branches of the motion which are to consolidate the appeals and, in effect, to deem the record and the appellant’s brief filed in connection with the appeal from the order to be filed in connection with the appeal from the judgment and for leave to serve and file a supplemental record containing the judgment and notice of appeal from the judgment are granted, and the appellant shall serve and file a supplemental record containing the judgment and notice of appeal from the judgment on or before January 2, 2018; and it is further,ORDERED that the 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 February 1, 2018, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.RIVERA, J.P., AUSTIN, CONNOLLY and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.By Balkin, J.P.; Roman, Sgroi and Duffy, JJ.Elisa Panek, res, v. Hratach Kaprielan, ap — Application to withdraw appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 28, 2015, and an order of the same court dated November 18, 2015.Upon the stipulation of the attorneys for the respective parties to the appeals dated December 5, 2017, it isORDERED that the application is granted and the appeals are deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements.BALKIN, J.P., ROMAN, SGROI and DUFFY, JJ., concur.Mirella Giberstein, res, v. Norman Weiss, ap — Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated June 30, 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.Randall Fiore, plf-res, v. Westerman Construction Company, Inc., defendant third-party plf-res, Westerman Construction Management and Consulting def-res, Eurotech Construction Corp, defendant-appellant; Trystate Mechanical Inc., third-party def-ap — Application by the third-party defendant-appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated June 7, 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 by the third-party defendant-appellant is marked withdrawn.By Leventhal, J.P.; Miller, Barros and Connolly, JJ.MATTER of Eric Jaimes, ap, v. Magdalena Gyerko, res — V-3286-17/17D, V-3286-17/17E) — Motion by the appellant, inter alia, to recall and vacate so much of a decision and order on motion of this Court dated August 22, 2017, as dismissed an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated June 23, 2017, and to stay the respondent from relocating with the subject children to Connecticut, pending hearing and determination of.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 recall and vacate so much of the decision and order on motion of this Court dated August 22, 2017, as dismissed the appeal from the order dated June 23, 2017, is granted, so much of the decision and order on motion of this Court dated August 22, 2017, as dismissed the appeal from the order dated June 23, 2017, is recalled and vacated, and the appeal is reinstated; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion is denied; and it is further,ORDERED that pursuant to §670.4(a) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]), the appeal in the above-entitled proceedings 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 decision and order on motion; 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 after 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 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 decision and order on motion, 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., MILLER, BARROS and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.Howard M. File, Esq., P.C., res, v. Celerant Plaza, formerly known as 4830 Arthur Kill Associates, LLC, ap — Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated October 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 and the appeal is marked withdrawn.PA Package Associates, LLC, res, v. Lawrence and Walsh, P.C. ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 31, 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.Samuel Schwartz res-ap, Riverside Abstract, LLC, res, Shaul Greenwald, Esq., appellant-res — Application by the appellant-respondent to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 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.Dillon Cook plf-res, v. Kyrollos E. Wanees defendants- res, The City of New York ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 1, 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.Pablo Jose Calixto Lopez, res, v. Zhen Jin Li ap — Application by the appellants to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 10, 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.Alex Justin Galan, res, v. Lorraine A. Nelson, ap — Application by the appellant to withdraw an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated July 6, 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.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.NYCTL 2014-A Trust plf, v. Zinc Realty, LLC def, Tenenbaum Berger & Shivers LLP, nonparty-ap — Application by the nonparty-appellant for leave to withdraw appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated September 2, 2016, and September 8, 2016, respectively.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 deemed withdrawn, without costs or disbursements.ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.Zdravko Budesa res, v. The Health Science Center at Brooklyn Foundation, Inc. appellants; (and a third-party action). — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 60-day enlargement of time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 23, 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 appellants’ time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until December 27, 2017, the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Lisa Garafola-Booth, plf-res, v. City of New York def-res, 24 Seven Plumbing, Inc., ap — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until February 16, 2018, to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated January 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 appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until December 28, 2017, the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, res, v. Horace J. Patrick, ap, et al., def — 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, Kings County, dated January 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 until December 29, 2017, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Waterfalls Italian Cuisine, Inc., et al, ap, v. Cheryl Sellitti, as executrix for the estate of Robert P. Tamaerin, Esq., res — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an 30-day enlargement of time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated April 6, 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 appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until December 26, 2017, the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.GMAC Mortgage, LLC, res, v. Winsome Coombs, appellant def — 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, Kings County, dated June 19, 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 until December 18, 2017, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Jonas Equities, Inc. plf, 495 East 7th Street Corporation ap, v. New York State Division of Human Rights, defendant-respondent def — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for a 30-day enlargement of time to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 9, 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 appellants’ time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until December 18, 2017, the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.Virginia Kurre, res, v. ACJ Realty, LLC, def, Joseph M. Capo, M.D., P.C., ap — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) for an enlargement of time until January 8, 2018 to serve and file a reply brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated December 7, 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 to the extent that the appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until December 28, 2017, the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date, and the application is otherwise denied.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Kyle Dickerson, ap — Application by the appellant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a reply brief on appeals from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County, both rendered August 9, 2013.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 until December 22, 2017, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, res, v. John Cave def, Nancy Cave, ap — 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, Nassau County, entered December 21, 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, the appellant’s time to serve and file a reply brief is enlarged until December 21, 2017, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, res, v. Melita L. Rines def, Jesse A. Rines, Sr. ap — Application by the respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered October 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, the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until December 26, 2017, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.Willie Brown, etc., res, v. New York City Transit Authority ap — Application by the appellants pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to perfect an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 22, 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 appellants’ time to perfect the appeal is enlarged until December 20, 2017, and the record or appendix on the appeal and the appellants’ brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.PEOPLE, etc., res, v. Mayer Herskovic, ap — 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 a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered March 16, 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 until December 18, 2017, and the reply brief shall be served and filed on or before that date.By Eng, P.J.; Mastro, Rivera, Dillon and Balkin, JJ.Arif S. Izmirligil, ap, v. Steven J. Baum, P.C. def-res, Thomas F. Whelan nonparty-res — On the Court’s own motion, it isORDERED that the order on application of this Court dated December 7, 2017, in the above-entitled case is recalled and vacated, and the following order on application is substituted therefor:Application by the appellant on appeals from a decision of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated August 24, 2016, an order and judgment (one paper) of the same court dated November 2, 2016, and an order of the same court dated November 18, 2016, to withdraw the appeals from the order and judgment and the order.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 from the order and judgment and the order are marked withdrawn; and it is further,ORDERED that on the Court’s own motion, the appeal from the decision is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, on the ground that no appeal lies from a decision (see Schicchi v. J.A. Green Constr. Co., 100 AD2d 509).ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.By Dillon, J.P.; Miller, Barros and Christopher, JJ.Gabriel Raymond Falco, ap, v. Laura Ann Bowery Falco, res — Motion by the appellant to stay the removal of the subject children from the State of New York and to continue their enrollment in Southhampton schools, pending hearing and determination of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated August 30, 2017, for poor person relief, and for the assignment of counsel. Separate motion by the appellant for leave to serve and file reply papers in connection with the order to show cause that initiated the motion, inter alia, for a stay, and to direct the respondent to furnish two medical releases.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 motion for a stay is denied; and it is further,ORDERED that the branches of the motion which are for poor person relief and for the assignment of counsel are denied with leave to renew on or before January 11, 2018, upon proper papers, including the appellant’s affidavit setting forth the appellant’s full financial situation including all assets, both real and personal, as well as any and all sources of income and expenses; and it is further,ORDERED that the motion for leave to serve and file reply papers in connection with the order to show cause that initiated the motion, inter alia, for a stay, and to direct the respondent to furnish two medical releases is denied.DILLON, J.P., MILLER, BARROS and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.By Chambers, J.P.; Hall, Iannacci and Barros, JJ.MATTER of Annetta Korszun, res, v. Matthew Kwas, ap — On the Court’s own motion, it isORDERED that the decision and order on motion of this Court dated December 11, 2017, in the above-entitled case is recalled and vacated, and the following decision and order on motion is substituted therefor:Motion by the appellant pro se for leave to prosecute an appeal from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated May 2, 2017, as a poor person.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 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 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 Family Court, and the clerk of the Family Court shall furnish one of such certified transcripts to the appellant, 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 appellant. The appellant 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 the appellant serves the appellant’s brief upon those parties; and it is further,ORDERED that the appellant shall prosecute the appeal expeditiously in accordance with any or orders issued pursuant to 670.4(a) of the rules of this Court (22 NYCRR 670.4[a]); and it is further,ORDERED that the appellant 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; 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 after 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 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 this decision and order on motion has been served upon the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken, 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 decision and order on motion, 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.CHAMBERS, J.P., HALL, IANNACCI and BARROS, JJ., concur.
