Court Filings
1,087 filings indexedRecent court opinions cross-linked with public notices by case number, summarized and classified by AI.
Dowdy v. Brooklyn Hosp. Ctr.
The Appellate Division affirmed a jury verdict and judgment awarding Lueray Dowdy damages for injuries from a slip-and-fall at the Brooklyn Hospital Center cafeteria. The jury found the hospital 60% at fault and the plaintiff 40% at fault, and awarded substantial sums for past and future pain and suffering and future medical expenses. The court rejected the hospital's posttrial challenges to the liability finding, fault apportionment, damages awards, and request for a collateral source hearing, but it modified the judgment to delete a provision directing payment of an attorney fee directly from the defendant to the plaintiff's counsel.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York2020-07332Diesel Funding, LLC v. Build Retail, Inc.
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the Supreme Court's order denying the defendants' motion to vacate a May 25, 2023 judgment and an August 22, 2022 stipulation of settlement in favor of Diesel Funding, LLC. The dispute arose from a receivables-purchase agreement where the lender purchased future receivables for $850,000 and could debit daily sales until receiving $1,274,150; parties later agreed to a settlement that allowed the plaintiff to enter judgment on default. The court concluded the transaction was not a usurious loan because repayment was not absolutely fixed and the agreement included daily-percentage payments, reconciliation procedures, and no finite term or bankruptcy-triggered default.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York2024-09041Cohen v. City of New York
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the Supreme Court's order granting the City of New York's motion for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff's personal-injury claim. The plaintiff said she tripped in a pothole in a crosswalk; the City showed it had no prior written notice of the specific defect under the City's Pothole Law. The court found the Big Apple map entries did not put the City on notice of a defect at the exact location of the fall, and the plaintiff did not raise a triable issue that the City created the defect or that an exception applied.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York2024-06592Citimortgage, Inc. v. Smith
The Appellate Division affirmed a Supreme Court order denying Brooklyn 7 Realty, Inc.'s late renewal motion to reopen and vacate a 2019 foreclosure judgment. Brooklyn 7 sought leave in 2023 to renew its opposition to confirmation of a referee's report, to vacate the foreclosure and dismiss the complaint as time-barred, or to amend its answer to assert a statute-of-limitations defense. The court held the renewal motion was untimely because it was made long after the judgment was entered and after the deadline to appeal had passed, so the lower court properly denied the motion without reaching the parties' other arguments.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York2024-01640Capo v. Peter & Danny Contrs., LLC
The Appellate Division affirmed a judgment dismissing the plaintiffs' consolidated personal-injury claims against defendant Montgomery Realty Associates. After a liability trial, the jury found for Montgomery; the plaintiffs moved to set aside that verdict and for judgment as a matter of law, but the trial court denied the motion. The appellate court held there was sufficient evidence to support the jury verdict because the fire resulted from the contractor's means and methods (use of a torch) rather than a defective condition of the building, so the landlord was not liable as a matter of law under the general rule for independent contractors and applicable exceptions did not apply.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York2024-07286Bank of Am., N.A. v. Sarwar
The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's January 22, 2024 order in a mortgage foreclosure action brought by Bank of America against Muhammad and Zubaida Sarwar. The trial court granted the bank summary judgment on the complaint as to the Sarwars, struck two affirmative defenses/counterclaims alleging a fraud/conspiracy and that bank employees facilitated illegal activity, and ordered reference. The appellate court agreed that Muhammad was precluded from testifying because he failed to complete his deposition as directed, declined to consider his affidavit, and found the defendants failed to raise a triable issue that the named bank employees had actual or apparent authority to bind the bank. Costs were awarded to the bank.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York2024-03593Authority Fleet Servs. Corp. v. Amtrust N. Am., Inc.
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed a lower court judgment that Amtrust North America must defend Authority Fleet Services and related plaintiffs in an underlying personal-injury lawsuit arising from a September 30, 2022 construction accident. The court held that the underlying complaint, liberally construed, reasonably suggested a possibility of coverage under the employer's workers' compensation and employers' liability policy, triggering the insurer's broader duty to defend. Because Amtrust failed to show there was no possible factual or legal basis for indemnity, the court affirmed the grant of summary judgment requiring Amtrust to defend the insureds.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York2024-06886Alam v. State of New York
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the Court of Claims' dismissal of Mansoor Alam's claim against the State of New York. Alam had sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and for intentional infliction of emotional distress after New York City Department of Social Services accepted his Medicaid application but required a monthly spenddown, which he said left him unable to cover living expenses. The court held the claim necessarily required review of an administrative agency determination and therefore fell outside the Court of Claims' subject-matter jurisdiction; such challenges must be pursued in Supreme Court by an Article 78 proceeding.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York2023-06403166 N. 7 St., LLC v. Sung Kyu Khim
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the Supreme Court's denial of the defendants' motion to vacate a default judgment and for a protective order. The plaintiff obtained a judgment after the defendants failed to appear or oppose a summary-judgment-in-lieu-of-complaint motion seeking rent and damages under a commercial lease and guaranty. The defendants later moved under CPLR 5015(a)(1) to vacate the November 2020 judgment and under CPLR 5240 to vacate restraining notices on bank accounts; the court found their excuses for default unreasonable and declined to disturb the restraining notices because they were needed to secure enforcement of the judgment.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York2021-01309Curtis Johnson v. the State of Texas
The Seventh Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed Curtis Johnson’s jury conviction for continuous sexual abuse of his six-year-old granddaughter and his 40-year prison sentence. Johnson argued the trial court erred by admitting evidence of prior sexual abuse against another victim (A.J.) because the State’s notice was insufficient. The court held Johnson waived complaint by not requesting a continuance or other relief to address alleged surprise, and even assuming error, any notice defect was harmless because the State had informed him of the victim, offenses, and date range well before trial and A.J. testified at a pretrial hearing.
Criminal AppealAffirmedTexas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)07-25-00343-CRHolley v. State of Florida
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed Michael Evan Holley’s appeal from a Union County circuit court decision and, in a per curiam opinion dated April 29, 2026, affirmed the lower court’s judgment. The opinion is brief: the court announced its unanimous decision to affirm and provided no extended written reasoning. The panel noted the availability of timely post-opinion motions under Florida appellate rules and identified counsel for both sides.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2024-1759Green v. State of Florida
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed De Ante George Green's appeal from the Leon County Circuit Court and, in a brief per curiam decision dated April 29, 2026, affirmed the lower court's judgment. The opinion contains no stated reasoning beyond the single-word disposition and notes that the decision is not final until timely post-judgment motions under Florida appellate rules are resolved. The panel of judges Lewis, Roberts, and Kelsey concurred. Green appeared pro se; the State was represented by the Attorney General's office.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2024-2681Rivera v. McGill
The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reviewed Jason M. Rivera’s pro se appeal from a decision by the Circuit Court for Manatee County. After considering the record and briefs, the panel issued a per curiam decision affirming the lower court’s judgment. The opinion contains no extended written reasoning and simply affirms the trial court decision. All three judges concurred and the mandate leaves the trial court’s ruling in place.
CivilAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-0592Johnson v. State of Florida
The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Bobby Lee Johnson from a Pinellas County circuit court judgment and, in a brief per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower court's decision. The opinion contains no published reasoning or citation; the panel affirmed the judgment below and all three judges concurred. The opinion is subject to revision before official publication.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2024-2707J. R. B. v. Department of Children and Families, Statewide
The Second District Court of Appeal reviewed a dependency case involving children E.W., C.M., and C.C. with J.R.B. as the appellant and the Department of Children and Families and the Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office as appellees. The appellate court issued a short per curiam decision and affirmed the lower court's ruling. No additional reasoning or changes to the trial court's orders were provided in the published opinion; the panel concurred and the judgment stands as affirmed.
FamilyAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-3145Hunter v. State of Florida
The court reviewed Andre Hunter's appeal from a Manatee County circuit court decision under Florida appellate rules. The Second District Court of Appeal, in a per curiam decision, affirmed the lower court's ruling. The opinion is short, unsigned, and gives no published reasoning; it simply states the judgment is affirmed and that the opinion may be revised before official publication.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-2384Gavrilis, Estate of John Monteforte v. Hayes
The District Court of Appeal, Second District of Florida, affirmed the circuit court's decision in a case brought by Nancy M. Gavrilis, as personal representative of the Estate of John Monteforte, and intervenor Stylianos Gavrilis, against appellee Sabrina Hayes. The appeal challenged the lower court's ruling; the appellate panel issued a short per curiam opinion simply stating 'Affirmed.' No opinion text explaining reasoning or issues is included in the document, and the judges concurred. The decision leaves the circuit court's judgment intact.
CivilAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-2202Fodor v. Gonda
The Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court's decision in a civil dispute between appellant Katalin Fodor and appellee Krisztian Gonda. The appeal was taken to the district court from the Pinellas County Circuit Court, and the appellate panel, writing per curiam, concluded that the lower court's ruling should stand. No extended opinion, reasoning, or factual discussion was provided in the published disposition beyond the court's one-line affirmance and concurrence by the three judges.
CivilAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-2655Cramer v. Walker
The appellate court reviewed an appeal by Stephanie Candace Moure Cramer from a Sarasota County circuit court decision in a dispute against Brendan Walker. The Second District issued a brief per curiam opinion on April 29, 2026, concluding only that the lower court's judgment should be affirmed. No published reasoning, factual background, or legal analysis appears in the opinion beyond the single-word disposition and concurrence by all three judges, and the opinion is subject to revision before official publication.
CivilAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-0580Casanas v. State of Florida
The Second District Court of Appeal of Florida considered an appeal by Jason Casanas from a decision of the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam opinion concluding that the circuit court's ruling should be affirmed. No extended reasoning, factual background, or specific legal issues are discussed in the published entry; the panel of judges concurred and the opinion was filed April 29, 2026.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2024-2543Bayless v. Animal Control
The District Court of Appeal, Second District, affirmed the county court's decision in favor of Hillsborough County Animal Control. Maurice F. Bayless, appearing pro se, appealed a county court judgment; the appeals court reviewed the matter and concluded there was no reversible error. The per curiam opinion provided no extended discussion and simply affirmed the lower court's ruling, with judges Morris, Atkinson, and Labrit concurring. No detailed factual or legal reasoning appears in the published entry.
CivilAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-1065Bailey v. State of Florida
The Second District Court of Appeal of Florida reviewed a pro se appeal by Labronx Bailey from a Hillsborough County circuit court order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). The appellate court, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower court's decision. No substantive reasoning or opinion text is provided in the published entry beyond the single-word disposition and concurrence by three judges. The opinion may be revised before official publication.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-2983Armstrong v. State of Florida
The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District, reviewed an appeal by Louis Narada Armstrong from a Manatee County circuit court decision. After considering the parties' filings and arguments, the appellate court issued a per curiam decision affirming the lower court's ruling. The opinion was brief, filed April 29, 2026, and did not elaborate reasoning in the published entry; the panel of judges concurred and the judgment of the circuit court stands as affirmed.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-2127Williams v. State of Florida
The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment below in a criminal case. The appeal was taken by Anthony Carl Williams, who proceeded pro se, from a decision of the Circuit Court for Alachua County. The appellate court issued a per curiam opinion, summarily rejecting the appellant's contentions and affirming the lower court's ruling without extended opinion. The panel judges concurred and the opinion notes the decision is not final until any timely authorized post-opinion motions are resolved.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-2017Pleas v. State of Florida
The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in a criminal/post-conviction matter brought by appellant Pythis Pleas. The per curiam opinion, issued April 29, 2026, contains a single-line disposition: AFFIRMED. The panel (Bilbrey, Kelsey, and M.K. Thomas, JJ.) concurred and noted the decision is not final until any timely permitted motions under Florida appellate rules are resolved. No reasoning, factual background, or legal analysis is included in the published entry.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-1634McNeal v. State of Florida
The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in a criminal case involving appellant Kemauri Lionel McNeal and the State of Florida. The opinion is per curiam, brief, and states only the disposition "AFFIRMED" without publishing reasoning in this document. The appeal arose from a judgment or order entered by the Circuit Court for Escambia County before Judge Amy P. Brodersen. The panel of judges (Lewis, Rowe, and Nordby) concurred, and the opinion notes that the decision is not final until any timely authorized motion is resolved under Florida appellate rules.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-1203Lee v. State of Florida
The First District Court of Appeal reviewed Gregory Wayne Orlando Lee's appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County and unanimously affirmed the lower court's decision. The opinion is per curiam, brief, and provides no extended reasoning in the published entry. The court's ruling leaves in place the judgment or order entered by the trial court and notes that the decision is not final until any timely postjudgment motion under Florida appellate rules is resolved.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-1901Harris v. State of Florida
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Tyrell Harris from a decision of the Circuit Court for Escambia County. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam opinion on April 29, 2026, and affirmed the lower court's ruling. No detailed reasoning is provided in the published entry; the court's short opinion simply states the judgment is affirmed and notes judges concurred. The decision is subject to potential timely motions under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331 before becoming final.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-0422Tyson v. State of Florida
The Second District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Shawn A. Tyson from a Sarasota County circuit court order. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision and affirmed the lower court's judgment. No opinion content or legal reasoning is provided in the published entry beyond the single-word disposition and noting that the judgment is subject to revision prior to official publication.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-3229Taylor v. State of Florida
The District Court of Appeal, Second District of Florida, affirmed the judgment below in a criminal appeal by Rashad Taylor from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County. The appeal was filed under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). The per curiam opinion, joined by all judges, issues a brief disposition affirming the lower court's decision without published opinion and notes the opinion may be revised before official publication.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2026-0261