Appeal from a memorandum decision and order of the Supreme Court, Chautauqua County (Grace M. Hanlon, J.), entered September 8, 2022. The memorandum decision and order, insofar as appealed from, granted the motion of defendant for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Burglary
ROBERT L. KEMP | SUB | |
MICHAEL J. HILLERY | SUB |
Attempted Burglary
Attempted Burglary
Attempted Burglary
Criminal Possession Weapon
DAVID J. PAJAK | SUB | |
BRADLEY W. OASTLER | 10 |
Murder
Murder
TIMOTHY S. DAVIS | SUB | |
NANCY GILLIGAN | SUB |
Murder
ALEXANDRA A.E. SHAPIRO | 15 | |
BRADLEY W. OASTLER | 10 |
Sexual Abuse
MELISSA SWARTZ | SUB | |
MORGAN RILEY MAYER | SUB |
Manslaughter
MELISSA SWARTZ | SUB | |
BRADLEY W. OASTLER | SUB |
Criminal Sale Controlled Substance
BRADLEY E. KEEM | 10 | |
V. CHRISTOPHER EAGGLESTON | 5 |
Attempted Aggravated Assault
FABIENNE NOELLE SANTACROCE | 10 | |
MARTIN P. MCCARTHY, II | 10 |
Neglect
THOMAS R. BABILON | 10 | |
JOSEPH MATTHEW MARZOCCHI | 10 | |
BRIAN P. DEGNAN | 10 |
Dismiss Complaint
PHILLIP G. STECK | 15 | |
STACEY E. TRIEN | 15 |
Personal Injury
JUSTIN L. HENDRICKS | 15 | |
ALAN D. VOOS | 15 |
Summary Judgment
DAVID C. SIELING | 15 | |
BRADLEY JOHN STAMM | 15 |
Probate
JENNIFER REBECCA COLLESANO | 15 | |
DAVID C. SIELING | 15 |
Default Judgment
Summary Judgment
JOSEPH M. CALIMERI | 15 | |
DAVID M. CIVILETTE | 15 |
Dismiss Complaint
SEAN P. MIX | 10 | |
ANTHONY JOSEPH PIETRAFESA | 15 |
Venue
If you are unable to access the archive of a particular argument because of a disability, please contact Alan Ross, Deputy Clerk of the Court and the Court’s designated ADA Liaison (by e-mail at aross@nycourts.gov or by telephone at 585-530-3102), to request a reasonable accommodation.
ASSISTED LISTENING devices are available in each courtroom during arguments. Please see a court attendant when you enter the courtroom.
CLOSED CAPTIONING is available while viewing archived (not live) oral arguments. Hover your mouse over the video and click the [cc] icon to activate the captions. Please note: these captions are generated by a computer algorithm and are not considered a transcript of the proceedings.
Periodically the court may suspend a broadcast to protect the privacy interests of individuals in matters before the Court.