Salem v. Mott

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Salem v. Mott

43 A.D.3d 397, 839 N.Y.S.2d 919

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

DecidedAugust 7, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 43 A.D.3d 397 (Salem v. Mott) 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

Salem v. Mott, 43 A.D.3d 397, 839 N.Y.S.2d 919 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by CMS Monitoring, Inc., as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohen, J), dated January 19, 2007, as granted the motion of Lisa Salem for payment of legal fees and directed it to pay the sum of $18,000 to Farley & Kessler, PC.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

“It is the appellant’s obligation to assemble a proper record on appeal” (Cohen v Wallace & Minchenberg, 39 AD3d 689, 689 [2007]). Where, as here, meaningful appellate review of the Supreme Court’s determination is made virtually impossible because of the incomplete nature of the record submitted, dismissal of the appeal is the appropriate disposition (id.; see Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Vargas, 288 AD2d 309, 310 [2001]; Singh v Getty Petroleum Corp., 275 AD2d 740 [2000]). Miller, J.E, Goldstein, Fisher and Coveflo, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by CMS Monitoring, Inc., as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohen, J), dated January 19, 2007, as granted the motion of Lisa Salem for payment of legal fees and directed it to pay the sum of $18,000 to Farley & Kessler, PC.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

“It is the appellant’s obligation to assemble a proper record on appeal” (Cohen v Wallace & Minchenberg, 39 AD3d 689, 689 [2007]). Where, as here, meaningful appellate review of the Supreme Court’s determination is made virtually impossible because of the incomplete nature of the record submitted, dismissal of the appeal is the appropriate disposition (id.; see Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Vargas, 288 AD2d 309, 310 [2001]; Singh v Getty Petroleum Corp., 275 AD2d 740 [2000]). Miller, J.E, Goldstein, Fisher and Coveflo, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.3d 397, 839 N.Y.S.2d 919, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salem-v-mott-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack