Court Filings

The Appellate Division reversed Supreme Court and held that the Chief Administrator of the Courts has the exclusive constitutional authority to appoint Chief Clerks and Deputy Chief Clerks of the Surrogates' Courts. The case arose from Erie County Surrogate Acea M. Mosey seeking a declaration that she had appointment power under the Surrogate's Court Procedure Act. The court concluded those statute-based appointment provisions are superseded by New York Constitution article VI, § 28 and implementing law and regulations vesting appointment authority in the Chief Administrator because the positions are nonjudicial officers within the Unified Court System.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department dismissed an appeal by defendant Bradford Morse challenging a Supreme Court order that, among other things, approved compensation for the Attorney for the Children in a matrimonial action. The court held the appeal could not proceed as of right because the challenged order did not decide a motion made on notice under CPLR 5701(a) and therefore is not immediately appealable. The panel declined to treat the notice of appeal as a permission-to-appeal application and denied discretionary review.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed a Supreme Court order granting summary judgment to two third-party defendants and denying NYAC summary judgment on its indemnification claim. Plaintiff sued for injuries from a scaffold fall. The court held that Next Level was not contractually obligated to indemnify NYAC because the indemnity language covered only claims arising from Next Level's work and there was no evidence plaintiff’s injury related to Next Level’s work. The court also held that an indemnity agreement between NYAC and Anderson, signed after the accident, could not be applied retroactively because NYAC failed to show the parties intended an earlier effective date.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department reversed a Supreme Court order that had dismissed claims against The William Powell Company for lack of personal jurisdiction in an asbestos-exposure wrongful-death action. The court held that the defendant, which moved for dismissal or summary judgment based on absence of long-arm jurisdiction, failed to meet its initial burden on the summary judgment standard. Because the defendant did not make a prima facie showing that plaintiff could not establish long-arm jurisdiction under CPLR 302(a)(3), the motion was denied and the complaint against The William Powell Company was reinstated.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, denied a CPLR article 78 petition by Leon Thomas challenging a prison disciplinary determination after a tier III hearing. The court confirmed the determination that Thomas violated certain incarcerated individual rules, noting Thomas pleaded guilty to two violations which barred review of the substantial-evidence claim as to those offenses, and it rejected his remaining challenges. The petition was dismissed and the determination confirmed without costs.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted Attorney Paul David Stern’s application to resign for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the submission as a resignation petition, found no disciplinary proceeding necessary, and approved the voluntary withdrawal from the bar. The decision is procedural—it removes Stern’s authorization to practice law in New York without imposing any disciplinary sanction or further proceedings.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed Family Court's order continuing custody of the child with Monroe County Department of Human Services. The mother had sought return of her child under Family Court Act § 1028 after a temporary removal. The court found petitioner proved that returning the child would present an imminent risk to the child's life or health because the mother suffers from untreated, severe mental health conditions, experiences frequent violent visions that sometimes include the child, lacks insight, does not take medication or seek therapy, and engages in unsafe behavior tied to those visions. The appellate court found a sound and substantial basis in the record for that determination.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted the application of attorney Donald T. Schmitt to resign from the practice of law for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the filing as an application to resign, found no disciplinary proceeding necessary, and granted the requested relief, resulting in Schmitt's voluntary cessation of his status as a licensed attorney in New York.

The Appellate Division affirmed a Supreme Court judgment granting a mandamus petition that required the Buffalo Comptroller to issue and sell bonds authorized by the Buffalo Common Council. The court held that the comptroller has no discretion to refuse issuance where the Common Council has validly authorized borrowing under the City Charter and the Local Finance Law. Although the comptroller has duties to advise and report on fiscal capacity and certain procedural roles, those responsibilities do not permit vetoing or declining to execute bond issuances lawfully authorized by the council.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted attorney Margaret M. Quinn's application to resign for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered her name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the filing as a voluntary, non-punitive resignation rather than the result of formal disciplinary proceedings and therefore approved removal without imposing sanctions. The decision is administrative: it grants the requested relief and updates the official roster of admitted attorneys accordingly.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department reversed a lower-court order that denied a final extreme risk protection order (ERPO) against a state correction officer, Mathew J. Galliher. The court held that petitioner New York State Police proved by clear and convincing evidence that respondent participated in a violent assault on a restrained inmate that caused serious injury and death, and thus met the statutory definition of a substantial risk of physical harm to others. The Fourth Department concluded the trial court applied the wrong standard and remitted the case for further proceedings consistent with issuance of the ERPO.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed Supreme Court’s denial of the Assembly’s CPLR article 78 petition seeking to stop the New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) from pursuing a discrimination and harassment complaint filed by employee Nicole Golias. DHR had found probable cause and added the Assembly as a respondent. The court held that prohibition is an extraordinary remedy limited to lack or excess of jurisdiction and may not be used to bypass administrative review. The Assembly must first pursue DHR’s administrative process and, if necessary, judicial review under Executive Law § 298.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed the Town of Floyd Zoning Board of Appeals' denial of three variances sought by petitioner Jeffrey Kotary to incorporate two shipping containers into a new barn and to exceed height and setback limits. Kotary sought judicial review under CPLR article 78 after the ZBA granted only a height variance and denied the other variances. The court held the ZBA properly applied the statutory balancing test, relied on safety concerns, feasible alternatives, and the largely self-created nature of petitioner’s need, and concluded there was a rational basis for denying the variances.

The Appellate Division reversed Family Court's dismissal of a mother's petition to modify a consent visitation order and remanded for further proceedings. The mother sought to change a consent order that granted joint custody with primary placement to the father and limited the mother to supervised agency visitation once per month and additional supervised visits “as agreed.” The appellate court found the mother proved a change in circumstances because the agency placement was effectively unavailable and the father refused to allow the agreed additional visitation, and held the case must proceed to a full hearing on whether modification would be in the children's best interests.

The Appellate Division affirmed Surrogate's Court's order dismissing petitioner Barrett Hess's petition to probate the will of Janet Hess. The court reviewed the surrogate's dismissal of the probate petition following respondents' motion to dismiss and agreed with the surrogate's reasoning. The appellate court concluded there was no reversible error in the surrogate's disposition and therefore upheld dismissal, awarding costs to respondents.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted Attorney Franklin William Heller's application to resign for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the submission as a voluntary resignation not prompted by disciplinary charges and granted the request, ending his authority to practice law in New York. There is no indication of misconduct findings or ongoing disciplinary proceedings in this decision; the court's action was procedural and limited to removing Heller's name from the attorney list.

The Fourth Department dismissed as moot Anthony Flowers's appeal from a CPLR article 78 judgment that had sought to annul the Parole Board's denial of parole. The court explained the challenged parole determination expired while the appeal was pending and the Board later denied Flowers a subsequent parole request, removing any live controversy. The court also found that the exception to the mootness doctrine did not apply and therefore affirmed dismissal without reaching the merits of the underlying parole decision.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed a Family Court order that granted the petitioner's written objection to a support magistrate's October 7, 2024 order in a Family Court child support proceeding. The appeal was taken by the respondent from the Family Court's November 27, 2024 order. The appellate court unanimously affirmed without costs, signaling it found no reversible error in the Family Court's disposition of the objection to the support magistrate's ruling.

The Appellate Division confirmed a referee's findings that attorney Diana G. Cunningham neglected two client matters, failed to communicate with clients and a court referee, and did not timely comply with attorney registration rules. The court found multiple violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and registration statutes. Because Cunningham has a substantial disciplinary history with similar prior misconduct, the Court suspended her for three years and until further order, but it stayed the suspension on conditions including compliance with registration rules, participation in mental health monitoring and an attorney mentoring program, quarterly reporting, and limits on active cases.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department reversed a Family Court order that dismissed the mother's custody petition and awarded joint custody after the mother failed to appear at a hearing. The court held that Family Court did not adequately ensure the mother knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived her right to counsel before allowing her to proceed pro se. Because the right to counsel in child custody proceedings is fundamental, the court reinstated the mother's petition and remitted the case to Family Court for a new hearing to allow a proper waiver inquiry and further proceedings.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, issued a memorandum and order on April 24, 2026, terminating a previously imposed suspension and granting Gregory Jon Butler's application for reinstatement to the practice of law. The court reviewed the reinstatement application under Judiciary Law section 468-a and related rules governing attorney discipline and reinstatement. Concluding that Butler met the requirements for readmission, the court ended his suspension and restored his right to practice in New York.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted an application by attorney Peter John Brevorka to resign from the practice of law for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the submission as a voluntary resignation rather than a disciplinary sanction and granted the requested relief, thereby terminating his status as an active attorney in New York State.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted an attorney’s application to resign for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court processed a petition by Cody Blake Bartlett seeking resignation that was not tied to any disciplinary proceeding. After reviewing the application, the court granted the request and removed Bartlett from the official list of licensed attorneys in New York State. No disciplinary finding was made against him in this decision.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department dismissed as moot a CPLR article 78 proceeding brought by petitioner Oscar Asencio challenging a Department of Corrections determination finding he violated incarcerated individual rules after a tier III hearing. The court concluded the challenge no longer presented a live controversy and cited controlling precedent on mootness. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition without costs and did not reach the merits of the disciplinary determination.

The Appellate Division affirmed Supreme Court's denial of petitioner Karen Anthone's motion for summary judgment in a proceeding to enforce a judgment lien against real property owned by George Carlo and the Carlo Family Trust. The court held that the trust is a self-settled trust and therefore its assets are available to satisfy the settlor's creditors, so petitioner did not need to prove a fraudulent conveyance. However, the court found a triable issue whether the homestead exemption applies to the property sale, so summary judgment was improper and the matter remains for further fact-finding on that exemption issue.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed Family Court's March 17, 2025 order in a child-protective proceeding under Family Court Act article 10, which had found that respondent Thomas M. neglected the child Aleena M. The appeal challenged that neglect determination; the appellate court issued a short per curiam affirmance, adopting the reasoning set out in its separate memorandum in Matter of Akeem M. (Thomas M.). The court thus left undisturbed the Family Court's findings and disposition holding Thomas M. neglectful.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed a Family Court order that found Thomas M. neglected the child Ahmilia M. This appeal challenged the Family Court’s neglect determination in a proceeding brought by the Onondaga County Department of Children and Family Services under Family Court Act article 10. The appellate court relied on the same reasoning and memorandum it used in a companion case (Matter of Akeem M. (Thomas M.)) and concluded there were no reversible errors, so the Family Court’s ruling stands and costs were denied.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed Family Court's order finding Heather H. neglected her child and placing her under the supervision of the Wayne County Department of Social Services. The appeal challenged the fact-finding that the mother's mental illness and illicit drug use caused neglect, but the appellate court held petitioner proved neglect by a preponderance of the evidence. The court relied on testimony and records showing the mother experienced delusions and paranoid behavior that placed the child's physical, mental, or emotional condition in imminent danger of impairment, and affirmed the dispositional supervision order.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department denied plaintiff-appellant Hoi Trinh's motion for reargument or for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals in his action against defendant-respondent Joseph Thien Nguyen. The court's one-paragraph memorandum and order, issued April 24, 2026, simply denies both requested forms of relief, leaving the prior appellate disposition in place and refusing further review by the state's highest court or reconsideration by this panel.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed a Supreme Court order in a medical malpractice and wrongful death case that compelled defendants TLC Health Network and Lake Shore Health Care Center to produce electronic medical record audit trails and related discovery. The court concluded the trial court did not abuse its broad discretion because new deposition evidence—developed after an earlier appeal—suggested audit-trail data might exist, had not been fully disclosed, and that defendants' representatives lacked knowledge about retention policies. The appellate court held the new evidence justified additional discovery and found no conflict with its prior decision.