Matter of Banks v. Ruth B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Banks v. Ruth B.

135 A.D.3d 667, 23 N.Y.S.3d 575

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 2016

Docket72N 401056/13

StatusPublished

This text of 135 A.D.3d 667 (Matter of Banks v. Ruth B.) 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

Matter of Banks v. Ruth B., 135 A.D.3d 667, 23 N.Y.S.3d 575 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Tanya R. Kennedy, J.), entered February 26, 2014, inter alia, appointing a guardian for respondent, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

By order entered on or about April 7, 2015, after a hearing attended by respondent, Supreme Court appointed Arthur *668 Schwartz, Esq., as respondent’s guardian, with her consent. The New York County Clerk issued a commission to Mr. Schwartz pursuant to that order, and respondent has been discharged from the nursing home in which she had been confined. These events render this appeal moot (see Sedita v Board of Educ. of City of Buffalo, 43 NY2d 827, 828 [1977]).

Another ground for dismissal is the insufficiency of the appendix (see CPLR 5528 [a] [5]), which fails to include certain parts of the record that are relevant and necessary to a determination of the appeal, most notably the transcript of the December 11, 2013 hearing at which respondent’s right to appear was allegedly waived and at which proof of incapacity would have been submitted (see e.g. Copp v Ramirez, 62 AD3d 23, 28 [1st Dept 2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 711 [2009]). Concur— Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Appeal from order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Tanya R. Kennedy, J.), entered February 26, 2014, inter alia, appointing a guardian for respondent, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

By order entered on or about April 7, 2015, after a hearing attended by respondent, Supreme Court appointed Arthur *668 Schwartz, Esq., as respondent’s guardian, with her consent. The New York County Clerk issued a commission to Mr. Schwartz pursuant to that order, and respondent has been discharged from the nursing home in which she had been confined. These events render this appeal moot (see Sedita v Board of Educ. of City of Buffalo, 43 NY2d 827, 828 [1977]).

Another ground for dismissal is the insufficiency of the appendix (see CPLR 5528 [a] [5]), which fails to include certain parts of the record that are relevant and necessary to a determination of the appeal, most notably the transcript of the December 11, 2013 hearing at which respondent’s right to appear was allegedly waived and at which proof of incapacity would have been submitted (see e.g. Copp v Ramirez, 62 AD3d 23, 28 [1st Dept 2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 711 [2009]). Concur— Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 A.D.3d 667, 23 N.Y.S.3d 575, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-banks-v-ruth-b-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack