Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
.—THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, V WALLACE DRAKE, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. - MOTION NO. (933/14) KA 12–01069.—THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. CLARENCE E. SCARVER, ALSO KNOWN AS “C,” DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. MOTION NO. (343/15) KA 11–02364.—THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, V DENYS ALMEIDA, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. - MOTION NO. (994/15) KA 11–01119.—THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, V MARQUIS PARKER, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. - MOTION NO. (131/17) KA 10–00287.—THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, V FRANK GARCIA, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. - MOTION NO. (411/17) CA 16–01124.—COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, PLAINTIFF–RESPONDENT, V ONONDAGA DEVELOPMENT, LLC, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. - MOTION NO. (1098/17) CA 15–02155.—PATRICIA A. RICKICKI, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF DAVID P. RICKICKI, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT, V BORDEN CHEMICAL, DIVISION OF BORDEN, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS, UNIMIN CORPORATION AND U.S. SILICA COMPANY, DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS. (ACTION NO. 1.) MICHAEL C. CROWLEY AND SHARON M. CROWLEY, PLAINTIFFS–APPELLANTS, V C–E MINERALS, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS, UNIMIN CORPORATION, UNIMIN SPECIALTY MINERALS, INC., MEYERS CHEMICALS, U.S. SILICA COMPANY, MALVERN MINERALS COMPANY, FERRO CORPORATION, NYCO MINERALS COMPANY AND CHARLES B. CHRYSTAL CO., INC., DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 1.) MOTION NO. (1099/17) CA 15–02156.—PATRICIA A. RICKICKI, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF DAVID P. RICKICKI, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT, V BORDEN CHEMICAL, DIVISION OF BORDEN, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS, UNIMIN CORPORATION AND U.S. SILICA COMPANY, DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS. (ACTION NO. 1.) MICHAEL C. CROWLEY AND SHARON M. CROWLEY, PLAINTIFFS–APPELLANTS, V C–E MINERALS, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS, UNIMIN CORPORATION, UNIMIN SPECIALTY MINERALS, INC., MEYERS CHEMICALS, U.S. SILICA COMPANY, MALVERN MINERALS COMPANY, FERRO CORPORATION, NYCO MINERALS COMPANY AND CHARLES B. CHRYSTAL CO., INC., DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 2.) MOTION NO. (1417/17) CA 16–01639.—JEFFREY'S AUTO BODY, INC., PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT, V ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY AND ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 1.) MOTION NO. (1418/17) CA 16–01640.—NICK'S GARAGE, INC., PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT, V ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ALLSTATE INDEMNITY COMPANY, AND ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 2.) MOTION NO. (50/18) KA 16–00046.—THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, V SHEILA M. KOWAL, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. - MOTION NO. (191/18) CA 17–01429.—RANDAL D. SMITH AND ALICIA SMITH, PLAINTIFFS–APPELLANTS, V SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT, ET AL., DEFENDANT. - MOTION NO. (218/18) KAH 17–00592.—THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK EX REL. JOHN A.J. HINSPETER, II, PETITIONER–APPELLANT, V DALE A. ARTUS, SUPERINTENDENT, ATTICA CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, RESPONDENT–RESPONDENT. - MOTION NO. (222/18) KA 11–01135.—THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, V MUZZAMMIL S. HASSAN, ALSO KNOWN AS MO HASSAN, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. - MOTION NO. (361/18) CA 17–01554.—LORNA FORBES, AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF HUGH FORBES, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF–RESPONDENT, V CARIS LIFE SCIENCES, INC., CARIS DIAGNOSTICS, INC., MIRCA LIFE SCIENCES, INC., AND MIRACA HOLDING GROUP, INC., DEFENDANTS–APPELLANTS. - MOTION NO. (363/18) CA 17–01248.—JONATHAN R. GUSTKE, PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT–RESPONDENT, V JONATHAN T. NICKERSON, BRIAN H. FOLEY, DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS, MARY BETH LIPOME AND MARY A. HOURT, DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS
- Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.
— Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.
- Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.
- Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.
- Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied.
- Motion for reargument be and the same hereby is granted in part and, upon reargument, the memorandum and order entered June 16, 2017 (151 AD3d 1793) is amended by deleting the ninth paragraph of the memorandum and replacing it with the following paragraph:
To the extent that the County contends that the encroachment was permissible under the doctrine of lateral support, the County's submissions in support of its motion do not contain that contention, and thus that contention is not properly before us (see Ciesinski, 202 A.D.2d at 985). Although the County asserts that it raised that contention in the memoranda of law that it submitted in support of its motion, we note that the memoranda of law are not part of the record on appeal, and the County failed to object to defendant's submitted appendix and failed to submit its own appendix containing those memoranda (see CPLR 5528[b]; 22 NYCRR 1000.4[d][2][ii]; Lyndaker v Board of Educ. of W. Can. Val. Cent. Sch. Dist., 129 AD3d 1561, 1564–1565 [4th Dept 2015]; see generally Zawatski v Cheektowaga–Maryvale Union Free Sch. Dist., 261 A.D.2d 860, 860 [4th Dept 1999], lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 754 [1999] ).
June 8, 2018.)
(ACTION NO. 2.)
— Motions for reargument or leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, and other relief denied.
(ACTION NO. 2.)
— Motions for reargument or leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, and other relief denied.
— Motion for reargument or leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.
— Motion for reargument or leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.
- Motion for reargument denied.
- Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.
- Motion for reargument denied.
- Motion for reargument denied.
- Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.
–APPELLANTS.— Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: MOTION NO. (586 /05)
Decided: June 08, 2018
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)