Christian v. Graham

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Christian v. Graham

73 A.D.3d 676, 899 N.Y.S.2d 671

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 4, 2010

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 73 A.D.3d 676 (Christian v. Graham) 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

Christian v. Graham, 73 A.D.3d 676, 899 N.Y.S.2d 671 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to impose a constructive trust upon [677]*677certain real property, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Adams, J.), dated June 18, 2009, as, after a nonjury trial, granted the motion of the defendant Joshua Samuel Graham pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law, made at the close of evidence, and is in favor of that defendant and against her, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs to the respondent, for failure to perfect the same in accordance with the CPLR and the rules of this Court (see CPLR 5528 [a]; 22 NYCRR 670.10-b [c] [1]).

“An appellant who perfects an appeal by using the appendix method must file an appendix that contains all the relevant portions of the record in order to enable the court to render an informed decision on the merits of the appeal” (Matter of Passalacqua, 31 AD3d 648, 648 [2006] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Cohen v 1651 Carroll Realty Corp., 23 AD3d 603 [2005]). Here, the appellant failed to provide this Court with an appendix containing a copy of the relevant portions of the trial transcript which is necessary to review the order and judgment appealed from (see Ayers v Ayers, 37 AD3d 629, 630 [2007]; Matter of Passalacqua, 31 AD3d 648 [2006]; Cohen v 1651 Carroll Realty Corp., 23 AD3d 603 [2005]). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed. Rivera, J.P., Dillon, Florio and Balkin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to impose a constructive trust upon [677]*677certain real property, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Adams, J.), dated June 18, 2009, as, after a nonjury trial, granted the motion of the defendant Joshua Samuel Graham pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law, made at the close of evidence, and is in favor of that defendant and against her, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs to the respondent, for failure to perfect the same in accordance with the CPLR and the rules of this Court (see CPLR 5528 [a]; 22 NYCRR 670.10-b [c] [1]).

“An appellant who perfects an appeal by using the appendix method must file an appendix that contains all the relevant portions of the record in order to enable the court to render an informed decision on the merits of the appeal” (Matter of Passalacqua, 31 AD3d 648, 648 [2006] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Cohen v 1651 Carroll Realty Corp., 23 AD3d 603 [2005]). Here, the appellant failed to provide this Court with an appendix containing a copy of the relevant portions of the trial transcript which is necessary to review the order and judgment appealed from (see Ayers v Ayers, 37 AD3d 629, 630 [2007]; Matter of Passalacqua, 31 AD3d 648 [2006]; Cohen v 1651 Carroll Realty Corp., 23 AD3d 603 [2005]). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed. Rivera, J.P., Dillon, Florio and Balkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 A.D.3d 676, 899 N.Y.S.2d 671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christian-v-graham-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack