Murev.Mure

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.Feb 7, 2012
937 N.Y.S.2d 870 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
937 N.Y.S.2d 87092 A.D.3d 6532012 N.Y. Slip Op. 942

2012-02-7

Anton MURE, appellant-respondent, v. Lisa MURE, respondent-appellant.

Mangi & Graham, LLP, Westbury, N.Y. (James J. Graham of counsel), for appellant-respondent. J. Douglas Barics, Garden City, N.Y., for respondent-appellant.


Mangi & Graham, LLP, Westbury, N.Y. (James J. Graham of counsel), for appellant-respondent. J. Douglas Barics, Garden City, N.Y., for respondent-appellant.

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated portions of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (M. Cohen, J.), dated July 15, 2010, and the defendant cross-appeals from the judgment.

ORDERED that the cross appeal is dismissed as abandoned ( see 22 NYCRR 670.8 [e] ); and it is further,

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed; and it is further,

ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendant.

“ ‘An appellant who perfects an appeal by using the appendix method must file an appendix that contains all the relevant portions of the record in order to enable the court to render an informed decision on the merits of the appeal’ ” ( Gandolfi v. Gandolfi, 66 A.D.3d 834, 835, 886 N.Y.S.2d 617, quoting NYCTL 1998–1 Trust v. Shahipour, 29 A.D.3d 965, 815 N.Y.S.2d 479; see Patel v. Patel, 270 A.D.2d 241, 704 N.Y.S.2d 606). “The appendix shall contain those portions of the record necessary to permit the court to fully consider the issues which will be raised by the appellant and the respondent” (22 NYCRR 670.10.2[c][1]; see CPLR 5528[a][5] ). Here, critical exhibits are missing from the plaintiff's appendix. “These omissions inhibit the court's ability to render an informed decision on the merits of the appeal” ( Matter of Embro v. Smith, 59 A.D.3d 542, 542, 872 N.Y.S.2d 291 [citation and internal quotation marks omitted]; see Gaffney v. Gaffney, 29 A.D.3d 857, 815 N.Y.S.2d 259). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed ( see Matter of Embro v. Smith, 59 A.D.3d at 542, 872 N.Y.S.2d 291).

RIVERA, J.P., ROMAN, SGROI and COHEN, JJ., concur.