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.
EMCO TECH CONSTRUCTION CORP., respondent, v. Anthony PILAVAS, et al., appellants, et al., defendants.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of a construction contract, the defendants Anthony Pilavas and Stoneytown Development, LLC, appeal from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Warshawsky, J.), entered August 25, 2008, as, after a nonjury trial, and upon an order of the same court dated June 12, 2008, in effect, granting that branch of the plaintiff's motion pursuant to CPLR 4404(b) which was to set aside so much of a decision of the same court dated April 1, 2008, as awarded the plaintiff the principal sum of $3,413, is in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant Anthony Pilavas in the principal sum of $128,028 and dismissed their counterclaims.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.
The defendants Anthony Pilavas and Stoneytown Development, LLC (hereinafter the appellants), failed to include the papers in support of, and in opposition to, the plaintiff's posttrial motion pursuant to CPLR 4404(b) in the record on appeal.
It is the appellants' obligation to assemble a proper record on appeal (see CPLR 5526; 22 NYCRR § 670.10.2[b]; Sebag v. Narvaez, 60 A.D.3d 485, 873 N.Y.S.2d 909). The appellants' reliance on CPLR 5528 is misplaced, as they did not utilize the appendix method when perfecting their appeal. In the present case, the record was inadequate because if failed to include all of the relevant documents that were before the Supreme Court (see Fernald v. Vinci, 13 A.D.3d 333, 786 N.Y.S.2d 211; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v. Vargas, 288 A.D.2d 309, 732 N.Y.S.2d 891). Appeals that are not based on a complete and proper record to enable this Court to render an informed decision on the merits must be dismissed (see Matter of Arcarian Sys., Ltd., 38 A.D.3d 649, 832 N.Y.S.2d 88; Garnerville Holding Co. v. IMC Mgt., 299 A.D.2d 450, 749 N.Y.S.2d 892; Matison v. County of Nassau, 290 A.D.2d 494, 736 N.Y.S.2d 115).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: December 15, 2009
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)