The Fourth Department determined defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict, based upon a connection between a juror and defendant’s mother, should not have been denied without a hearing: … [T]he court erred in summarily denying his motion to set aside the verdict pursuant to CPL 330.30 (2). The sworn allegations in support of defendant’s […]
The Fourth Department, reversing County Court, determined defendant’s probation should not have been revoked absent a hearing or an admission: “A court may not revoke a sentence of probation without finding that the defendant has violated a condition [there]of . . . and affording [him or her] an opportunity to be heard (see CPL 410.70 [1]). […]
The Second Department, reversing Supreme Court, determined the referee’s report in this foreclosure action should not have been confirmed because plaintiff did not demonstrate compliance with the notice requirements: … [T]he Supreme Court should not have confirmed the Referee’s report. The plaintiff failed to submit any evidence at the hearing of compliance with the mailing requirement […]
The Fourth Department, reversing (modifying) Supreme Court, determined that the fiber optic cables and equipment at issue constitute taxable property under RPTL 102, in that the statutory exception for radio and television signals was not demonstrated to be applicable: … [T]ax exclusions are never presumed or preferred and before [a] petitioner may have the benefit […]
The Fourth Department, reversing Supreme Court and dismissing the indictment on speedy trial grounds, determined the 87 day delay during which the People sought a superseding indictment was attributable to the People despite their “ready for trial” announcement and despite the absence of a specific request for an adjournment: … [The]period of delay was “attributable to […]
The Second Department, reversing Supreme Court, determined plaintiff bank’s unexcused failure to appear at a scheduled conference required denial of the bank’s motion to vacate a default judgment: Although CPLR 3215(c) was not an appropriate ground upon which to dismiss the complaint because the plaintiff initiated proceedings for the entry of a judgment by moving […]
The Second Department determined three causes of action in a lawsuit brought by a church (Eltingville) against the Synod and its Bishop (stemming from the Synod’s decision to place a school owned and operated by Eltingville under its control) were not justiciable in state courts because of the constitutional separation of church and state: … […]
The Fourth Department, vacating the guilty plea and dismissing the indictment, determined the handgun discarded by the defendant during a police chase should have been suppressed. The police were responding to information that a black male had discharged a weapon. There were several black males in the area and nothing indicated defendant was involved in […]
The Second Department, reversing defendant’s conviction, determined that the failure to include the justification defense on the verdict sheet may have led the jurors to believe they had to reconsider the justification defense for each count. The judge had correctly instructed the jurors to acquit on all counts if the justification defense applied, but the […]
The Second Department, reversing (modifying) Supreme Court determined the Labor Law 240 (1) and 241 (6) causes of action should not have been dismissed. There was conflicting evidence whether the plywood which flexed causing plaintiff to fall was over a three-foot deep hole or trench: … [T]here was conflicting deposition testimony regarding whether the plywood […]
Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy