Connolly v. Nina
Opinion
| Connolly v Nina |
| 2025 NY Slip Op 03551 |
| Decided on June 11, 2025 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided on June 11, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P.
DEBORAH A. DOWLING
JANICE A. TAYLOR
PHILLIP HOM, JJ.
2024-11642
(Index No. 526/24)
v
Venessa Nina, respondent.
Debrasue Connolly, New York, NY, appellant pro se.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the plaintiff from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Aaron D. Maslow, J.), dated October 15, 2024, as, after a hearing, is in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiff, in effect, awarding the defendant possession of two dogs.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
Where an appeal is perfected by the appendix method, the appendix must contain all the relevant portions of the record in order to enable the court to render an informed decision on the merits of the appeal (see CPLR 5528[a][5]; 22 NYCRR 1250.7[d][1]; Ravasio v La Pata, 216 AD3d 686, 686-687). Here, the appendix does not include, among other things, the complete transcript of the hearing held before the Supreme Court (see CPLR 5525). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.
BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P., DOWLING, TAYLOR and HOM, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Darrell M. Joseph
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2025 NY Slip Op 03551 (Connolly v. Nina) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.