Cases

Appeal by the de*716fendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mangano, Jr., J.), imposed September 10, 2009, on the ground that the sentence was excessive. Ordered that the sentence is affirmed. No opinion. Prudenti, P.J., Fisher, Santucci, Belen and Lott, JJ., concur.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mangano, Jr., J.), rendered February 4, 2009, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent Guy James Mangano, Jr." a Justice of the Supreme Court, Kings County, to “investigate the improprieties of Lt. Milo,” and application by the petitioner for poor person relief. Ordered that the application for poor person relief is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is other

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, in effect, to compel this Court to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Justices William Wetzel of the Supreme Court, New York County, and Guy Mangano, Jr., of the Supreme Court, Kings County, or to remove them from the bench. Application by the petitioner to prosecute this proceeding as a poor person. Ordered that the application to prosecute this proceeding as a poor person is granted to

Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (R. Doyle, J.), rendered January 26, 2011, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree under Indictment No. 1338/09, upon his plea of guilty, and sentencing him to a determinate term of 25 years imprisonment plus a five-year period of postrelease supervision, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered January 26, 2011, revoking a sentence of probatio

Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (R. Doyle, J.), rendered January 26, 2011, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree under Indictment No. 1338/09, upon his plea of guilty, and sentencing him to a determinate term of 25 years imprisonment plus a five-year period of postrelease supervision, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered January 26, 2011, revoking a sentence of probatio

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, Robert Vinci appeals (1) from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), entered December 17, 2007, which, upon an order of the same court dated August 30, 2007, denying his motion to vacate an arbitration award and granting the petitioner’s cross motion to confirm the arbitration award, confirmed the arbitration award (2), as limited

In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring that the defendant Zurich American Insurance Company is obligated to defend and indemnify the plaintiffs in an underlying action entitled Ugur v 140 Broadway Property, LLC, pending in the Supreme Court, Kings County, under index No. 25238/05, as an additional insured under a certain policy of insurance issued by the defendant Zurich American Insurance Company to the defendant Schindler Elevator C

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated July 30, 1998, which granted the motion of the defendant Eastside China, Ltd., inter alia, to vacate its default in appearing in the action. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. Based upon all of the relevant factors, the Supreme Court did not improvid

OPINION OF THE COURT Memorandum. Judgment of conviction affirmed. Defendant was charged with harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26 [3]) and three counts of aggravated harassment in the second degree which were subsequently reduced to attempted aggravated harassment in the second degree. Following a nonjury trial, defendant was convicted of one count of attempted aggravated harassme

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mangano, Jr., J.), rendered January 10, 2006, convicting him of assault in the first degree and gang assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the facts, by vacating the conviction of assault in the first degree under count three of the indictment, vacating the sentence imposed thereon,

In an action to recover under a fire insurance policy, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated March 24, 1998, as granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. The plaintiffs contend that the defendant insurance company issued a te

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the third-party defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated May 14, 1999, as denied its motion, inter alia, to strike the plaintiff’s supplemental bill of particulars and to preclude the plaintiff from introducing into evidence the claims of new injuries raised therein, or, in the alternative, to remove the case from the trial calendar pendi

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated August 20, 1996, as granted the motion of the defendant Xerox Corporation for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it as time-barred. Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. T

—In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated November 8, 1996, as, sua sponte, directed it to pay a sanction in the sum of $2,500 to the attorneys for the plaintiffs Joseph Bosco and Debra Bosco. Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without cos

—In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated February 28, 1996, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted, and the complaint is dismissed. It is well settled that a la