Cohen v. 1651 Carroll Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cohen v. 1651 Carroll Realty Corp.

23 A.D.3d 603, 805 N.Y.S.2d 632

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

DecidedNovember 28, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 23 A.D.3d 603 (Cohen v. 1651 Carroll Realty Corp.) 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

Cohen v. 1651 Carroll Realty Corp., 23 A.D.3d 603, 805 N.Y.S.2d 632 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

In a consolidated action for specific performance of contracts for the sale of two parcels of real property, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Garson, J.) dated February 11, 2004, as denied their claim for a credit of $42,518.10 which was awarded to the plaintiff Bertram Cohen, inter alia, for unpaid real estate taxes.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs, 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]).

“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” (Patel v Patel, 270 AD2d 241, 241 [2000]; see Lucadamo v Bridge To Life, Inc. 12 AD3d 422 [2004]; Svoboda v Svoboda, 275 AD2d 742 [2000]). The defendants failed to provide this Court with an appendix containing copies of the transcripts which are necessary to review the order and judgment appealed from. Schmidt, J.P., Cozier, Rivera and Fisher, JJ., concur.

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

In a consolidated action for specific performance of contracts for the sale of two parcels of real property, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Garson, J.) dated February 11, 2004, as denied their claim for a credit of $42,518.10 which was awarded to the plaintiff Bertram Cohen, inter alia, for unpaid real estate taxes.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs, 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]).

“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” (Patel v Patel, 270 AD2d 241, 241 [2000]; see Lucadamo v Bridge To Life, Inc. 12 AD3d 422 [2004]; Svoboda v Svoboda, 275 AD2d 742 [2000]). The defendants failed to provide this Court with an appendix containing copies of the transcripts which are necessary to review the order and judgment appealed from. Schmidt, J.P., Cozier, Rivera and Fisher, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.3d 603, 805 N.Y.S.2d 632, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-1651-carroll-realty-corp-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack