Lucadamo v. Bridge To Life, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lucadamo v. Bridge To Life, Inc.

23 A.D.3d 627, 804 N.Y.S.2d 273

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

DecidedNovember 28, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.3d 627 (Lucadamo v. Bridge To Life, 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

Lucadamo v. Bridge To Life, Inc., 23 A.D.3d 627, 804 N.Y.S.2d 273 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover misappropriated corporate funds, the defendant appeals from four orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), dated December 17, 2003, January 23, 2004, January 23, 2004, and March 31, 2004, respectively, and a judgment of the same court entered March 12, 2004.

Ordered that the appeals are dismissed, with costs, for failure to perfect the same in accordance with the CFLR and the rules [628]*628of this Court (see CPLR 5528 [a]; 5529 [b], [c]; 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” ’ ” (Lucadamo v Bridge To Life, Inc., 12 AD3d 422, 422 [2004], quoting Svoboda v Svoboda, 275 AD2d 742, 742 [2000]; see Patel v Patel, 270 AD2d 241 [2000]). The appellant failed to provide this Court with an appendix containing copies of the motion papers, affidavits, and transcripts that are relevant to the orders and judgment appealed from. H. Miller, J.P., Luciano, Dillon and Covello, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover misappropriated corporate funds, the defendant appeals from four orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), dated December 17, 2003, January 23, 2004, January 23, 2004, and March 31, 2004, respectively, and a judgment of the same court entered March 12, 2004.

Ordered that the appeals are dismissed, with costs, for failure to perfect the same in accordance with the CFLR and the rules [628]*628of this Court (see CPLR 5528 [a]; 5529 [b], [c]; 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” ’ ” (Lucadamo v Bridge To Life, Inc., 12 AD3d 422, 422 [2004], quoting Svoboda v Svoboda, 275 AD2d 742, 742 [2000]; see Patel v Patel, 270 AD2d 241 [2000]). The appellant failed to provide this Court with an appendix containing copies of the motion papers, affidavits, and transcripts that are relevant to the orders and judgment appealed from. H. Miller, J.P., Luciano, Dillon and Covello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.3d 627, 804 N.Y.S.2d 273, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lucadamo-v-bridge-to-life-inc-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack