Opinion
2012-06-6
Martha COELLO, appellant, v. Graciano GONZALEZ, respondent.
Martha Coello, Syosset, N.Y., appellant pro se. Alejandro Rodriguez, Brooklyn, N.Y., for respondent.
Martha Coello, Syosset, N.Y., appellant pro se. Alejandro Rodriguez, Brooklyn, N.Y., for respondent.
In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Mahon, J.), dated May 9, 2011, which denied her motion for summary judgment on the complaint.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.
“It is the obligation of the appellant to assemble a proper record on appeal” ( Gaffney v. Gaffney, 29 A.D.3d 857, 857, 815 N.Y.S.2d 259;see Civil v. Tae Hwa Sim, 65 A.D.3d 1074, 885 N.Y.S.2d 419;Fernald v. Vinci, 13 A.D.3d 333, 786 N.Y.S.2d 211). An appellant's record on appeal must contain all of the relevant papers that were before the Supreme Court ( see CPLR 5526; Cohen v. Wallace & Minchenberg, 39 A.D.3d 689, 833 N.Y.S.2d 623;Gaffney v. Gaffney, 29 A.D.3d 857, 815 N.Y.S.2d 259;Fernald v. Vinci, 13 A.D.3d 333, 786 N.Y.S.2d 211).
Here, the record is inadequate. The appellant failed to include all of the relevant documents that were before the Supreme Court, omitting, inter alia, the papers submitted by the defendant to the Supreme Court in opposition to her motion for summary judgment on the complaint. These omissions have rendered meaningful appellate review of the Supreme Court's order virtually impossible ( see CPLR 5526; Cohen v. Wallace & Minchenberg, 39 A.D.3d 689, 833 N.Y.S.2d 623;Gaffney v. Gaffney, 29 A.D.3d 857, 815 N.Y.S.2d 259;Fernald v. Vinci, 13 A.D.3d 333, 786 N.Y.S.2d 211). Accordingly, dismissal of the appeal is the appropriate disposition ( see Matter of Butti v. Butti, 92 A.D.3d 781, 938 N.Y.S.2d 458;Clarke v. Clarke, 90 A.D.3d 690, 934 N.Y.S.2d 345;CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Thorpe, 87 A.D.3d 1048, 929 N.Y.S.2d 752;Cohen v. Wallace & Minchenberg, 39 A.D.3d at 690, 833 N.Y.S.2d 623).