Batista v. Delbaum, Inc.

234 A.D.2d 45, 650 N.Y.S.2d 219, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12297
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 5, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 234 A.D.2d 45 (Batista v. Delbaum, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Batista v. Delbaum, Inc., 234 A.D.2d 45, 650 N.Y.S.2d 219, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12297 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alfred Toker, J.H.O.), entered June 28, 1995, which denied intervenor United States Liability Insurance Company’s motion for an order vacating the judgment and bill of costs entered on or about March 3, 1995 in favor of plaintiffs Nicholas Batista and Martin Martinez against defendant Delbaum, Inc. and dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against Delbaum for failure to take proceedings for the entry of judgment within one year, is unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the order is vacated.

It is well settled law that an order of reference to a Judicial Hearing Officer (J.H.O.) to hear and determine is permissible only with the consent of the parties (CPLR 4317 [a]; McCormack v McCormack, 174 AD2d 612; Haibi v Haibi, 171 AD2d 842), and that such consent is an "essential jurisdictional predicate” (Litman, Asche, Lupkin & Gioiella v Arashi, 192 AD2d 403).

In the matter before us, the Order to Show Cause signed by the Judicial Hearing Officer represents J.H.O. Toker to be a Justice of the Supreme Court, while the June 28, 1995 order which is on appeal indicates his actual position as Judicial Hearing Officer. There is no record of an order of reference or an agreement between the parties to have a Judicial Hearing Officer decide United States Liability’s motion. Since there is no demonstration that United States Liability acquiesced in the submission of its motion to a Judicial Hearing Officer, the order must be vacated. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Rubin, Ross, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Petriashvili (Levan)
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017
Todres v. Freifeld
2017 NY Slip Op 4905 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
People v. Santana (Joel)
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016
David S.S. v. Mia B.M.
48 A.D.3d 1246 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Pro-Biz Enterprises, Inc. v. Kozan
19 A.D.3d 1115 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Nguyen v. Prime Residential Bronx R&R V LLC
307 A.D.2d 201 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Osmundson v. Held-Cummings
306 A.D.2d 950 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Baines v. Shapiro
299 A.D.2d 193 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
People v. Hudson
189 Misc. 2d 129 (New York Supreme Court, 2001)
People v. Holt
182 Misc. 2d 919 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
In re Heather J.
244 A.D.2d 762 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Dunleavy v. White
236 A.D.2d 316 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
234 A.D.2d 45, 650 N.Y.S.2d 219, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/batista-v-delbaum-inc-nyappdiv-1996.