Dolen v. Pitt
Decision Date | 02 October 1989 |
Parties | Eric DOLEN, Respondent, v. Daniel PITT, Appellant. |
Court | New York County Court |
James M. Bryant, for respondent.
Mid-Mohawk Legal Services, Inc., (Eliot King, of counsel), for appellant.
DECISION AND ORDER
Respondent moves to dismiss an appeal from the Justice Court, Town of Middleburgh (Nunamann, T.J.) in a summary eviction proceeding wherein respondent-landlord was granted a Judgment and Warrant of Eviction removing appellant-tenant from a mobile home park. For the reasons which follow, respondent's motion to dismiss the within appeal should be denied.
This summary proceeding was tried by the Justice Court, Town of Middleburgh On April 3, 1989, appellant-tenant filed a Notice of Appeal with the Justice Court, Town of Middleburgh and served a copy upon the attorney for petitioner-landlord.
without a jury on March 2, 1989. Stenographic notes were not taken. On March 9, 1989, the Justice Court rendered a Decision in favor of petitioner-landlord, and a Judgment and Warrant of Eviction issued that same day
Uniform Justice Court Act § 1704(a) provides as follows:
(emphasis supplied)
Since most Justice Court's do not have a clerk, the obligation to draw up a statement setting forth the substance of the proceedings and to prepare and file a return falls to the Justice himself under UCJA § 2101(f) (see "Practice Commentary" by Professor David D. Siegel: McKinney's Consolidated Laws: UCJA § 1704; Vol. 29A, Part 2, p. 249).
Should an appeal to County Court be dismissed when the Justice Court does not comply with the mandatory provisions of UCJA § 1704(a)?
This Court holds and determines that the failure by the Justice Court, Town of Middleburgh to comply with the mandatory procedure set forth in UCJA § 1704(a) should not and cannot result in a dismissal of the appeal based upon appellant's failure to prosecute.
Nevertheless, this Court does hold and determine that the burden of compelling the preparation of the minutes of the proceedings by the Town Justice logically falls upon the appellant (see by way of analogy, Criminal Procedure Law § 460.10(3)(e)).
If the appellant persists in doing absolutely nothing to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cash v. Maggio
...office as to the proper mode of perfection, this Court can not deem Appellant responsible for the failure (see generally Dolen v. Pitt, 145 Misc.2d 227, 546 N.Y.S.2d 324 [Scoharie Co.Ct.1989] ).II.Perfection of Justice Court Appeals is governed primarily by Uniform Justice Ct. Act § 1704, w......