Baez v. Brown

Full title: In the Matter of Candido Baez, appellant, v. Richard A. Brown, etc., et…

Court: Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

Date published: Oct 28, 2011

2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 88393 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

Motion No: 2011-00378 Index No. 24221/09 M127993

10-28-2011

In the Matter of Candido Baez, appellant, v. Richard A. Brown, etc., et al., respondents.

PETER B. SKELOS

, J.P.

RUTH C. BALKIN

JOHN M. LEVENTHAL

L. PRISCILLA HALL, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the respondent Raymond W. Kelly to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 27, 2010, on the ground that the appellant failed to serve his appendix and on the further ground that no appeal lies from an order denying reargument, or in the alternative, to direct the appellant to serve his appendix on the respondent Raymond W. Kelly and to enlarge the time to serve and file his brief. Separate motion by the respondent Richard A. Brown to dismiss the appeal on the grounds that the appellant failed to serve his appendix, the appeal was not timely perfected, and no appeal lies from an order denying reargument, or in the alternative, to enlarge his time to serve and file a brief. Application by the respondent Richard A. Brown pursuant to 22 NYCRR 670.8(d)(2) to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motions and the 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 is

ORDERED that the branches of the motions which are to dismiss the appeal on the ground that no appeal lies from an order denying reargument are denied without prejudice to the respondents raising the issue in their briefs; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branches of the motions which are to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appellant failed to serve his appendix on the respondents are denied as academic as the appendix has been served on the respondents; and it is further,

ORDERED that on the Court's own motion, the appendix is deemed timely served; and it is further,

ORDERED that the application and the branches of the motions which are to enlarge time to serve and file briefs are granted, the respondents' time to serve and file their respective briefs is enlarged until December 27, 2011, and the respondents' briefs shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,

ORDERED that the motions are otherwise denied.

SKELOS, J.P., BALKIN, LEVENTHAL and HALL, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Matthew G. Kiernan

Clerk of the Court