DeSantis v. General Advisory & Funding Corp.DeSantis v. General Advisory & Funding Corp.
Versions:21 A.D.3d 1051802 N.Y.S.2d 702
先行
The user wants me to convert a legal document from images and OCR into clean, semantic HTML.
**Case 1: DeSantis v. General Advisory & Funding Corp.**
- Parties: Philip DeSantis, Respondent, v General Advisory & Funding Corp., Appellant.
- Citation: 802 NYS2d 702
- Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York (indicated by the judge names and style, though not explicitly on the page, the citation style is NY AD).
- Date: July 31, 2003 (order appealed from). The decision date is not explicitly on the snippet, but the citation 802 NYS2d 702 corresponds to 21 AD3d 1051. Decision date is September 26, 2005. I will look for clues.
- Judges: Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Mastro and Rivera, JJ. (for the first part); H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Ritter and Spolzino, JJ. (for the DeSantis case).
- Actually, looking at the first page:
- The first paragraph is the end of a previous case (about a marble saddle). I should skip this according to instructions (“Skip partial content from a previous case that appears at the beginning of the document“).
- The main opinion starts with “Philip DeSantis, Respondent, v General Advisory & Funding Corp., Appellant. [802 NYS2d 702]“.
- Page 1 starts at 1051. Page 2 starts at 1052.
**Case Information Extraction for DeSantis v. General Advisory & Funding Corp.:**
- `shortName`: DeSantis v. Gen. Advisory & Funding Corp.
- `docket`: Not explicitly stated on page, usually AD cases use a docket number, but I‘ll stick to what‘s visible.
- `court`: N.Y. App. Div. (Appellate Division, Second Department is inferred from Judges/NYS2d).
- `date`: September 26, 2005 (based on citation 21 AD3d 1051). The snippet doesn‘t show the decision date, only the order date “July 31, 2003“. Wait, looking at the Judges’ names and citation, this is indeed 21 AD3d 1051.
- `citation`: 21 AD3d 1051, 802 NYS2d 702.
- `judges`: H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Ritter and Spolzino, JJ.
**Case 2 starts on page 1052:**
- “James DiGiacomo et al., Respondents-Appellants, v Cabrini Medical Center et al., Appellants-Respondents. [803 NYS2d 587]”
- I should only convert the first full opinion. The first one is DeSantis.
**DeSantis Case Structure:**
- Caption
- Paragraph 1: “In an action to recover...”
- Paragraph 2: “Ordered that...”
- Paragraph 3: “The Supreme Court correctly...”
- Page break 1052
- Paragraph 4: “The Supreme Court also correctly...”
- Judges: H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Ritter and Spolzino, JJ., concur.
**Citations in DeSantis:**
- Trincere v County of Suffolk, 90 NY2d 976 [1997] -> Case
- Nathan v City of New Rochelle, 282 AD2d 585 [2001] -> Case
- Morris v Greenburgh Cent. School Dist. No. 7, 5 AD3d 567 [2004] -> Case
- Hargrove v Baltic Estates, 278 AD2d 278 [2000] -> Case
- Penal Law § 190.40 -> Law (N.Y. Penal Law § 190.40)
- Freitas v Geddes Sav. & Loan Assn., 63 NY2d 254, 262 [1984] -> Case
- Fareri v Rain‘s Intl., 187 AD2d 481, 482 [1992] -> Case
- Seidel v 18 E. 17th St. Owners, 79 NY2d 735, 743 [1992] -> Case
- Russo v Carey, 271 AD2d 889, 890 [2000] -> Case
- Greenfield v Skydell, 186 AD2d 391 [1992] -> Case
- Angelo v Brenner, 90 AD2d 131 [1982] -> Case
- Hammond v Marrano, 88 AD2d 758, 760 [1982] -> Case
- 28 USC § 1334 [e] -> Law
- Hart Sys. v Arvee Sys., 244 AD2d 527 [1997] -> Case
- Bromley v Fleet Bank, 240 AD2d 611 [1997] -> Case
- Weiss v Goldfeder, 201 AD2d 644 [1994] -> Case
**Pagination:**
- Page 1 starts at 1051. But the content I‘m converting starts mid-page.
- Page 2 starts at 1052.
**Refining Metadata:**
- Case Name: Philip DeSantis, Respondent, v General Advisory & Funding Corp., Appellant.
- shortName: DeSantis v. Gen. Advisory & Funding Corp.
- Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York. (Bluebook: N.Y. App. Div.)
- Date: Not visible on page, but usually it‘s at the top or bottom. The citation 802 NYS2d 702 is provided.
- Citation: 802 NYS2d 702
**Wait, the text at the very top is a different case.**
The DeSantis case starts after the square block.
The first case on page 1051 (marble saddle) is partial. The prompt says “If the document contains multiple opinions... convert only the MAIN opinion — the one with a complete case caption and full opinion body. Skip partial content from a previous case that appears at the beginning of the document.”
So, I start with “Philip DeSantis, Respondent, v General Advisory & Funding Corp., Appellant.”
**Text check for DeSantis:**
- “In an action to recover the balance due on a promissory note...”
- “Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.”
- “The Supreme Court correctly denied the defendant‘s motion...”
- Mid-paragraph break: “The Supreme Court also correctly determined that the defen- / dant...” -> “defendant”
**Formatting Law:**
- Penal Law § 190.40 -> jurisdiction=“NY” cite=“N.Y. Penal Law § 190.40”
- 28 USC § 1334 [e] -> jurisdiction=“US” cite=“28 U.S.C. § 1334(e)”
**Formatting Case:**
- Freitas v Geddes Sav. & Loan Assn., 63 NY2d 254, 262 [1984]
- 802 NYS2d 702 is the reporter citation for the DeSantis case.
- Note: The prompt asks for volume + reporter + starting page. DeSantis is 21 AD3d 1051.
**Wait, looking at the layout:**
Page 1051 has the end of one case, then DeSantis starts.
Page 1052 has the end of DeSantis, then DiGiacomo starts.
I will convert the DeSantis case as it is the first complete one starting on the provided pages.
**Case Info Block for DeSantis:**
- Name: Philip DeSantis, Respondent, v General Advisory & Funding Corp., Appellant.
- citation: 21 AD3d 1051, 802 NYS2d 702
- date: inferred from citation if not on page? No, I‘ll stick to what‘s visible or likely. I will use the citation as the citation block.
- Court: N.Y. App. Div.
Let‘s look at the first page OCR again.
“Philip DeSantis, Respondent, v General Advisory & Funding Corp., Appellant. [802 NYS2d 702]”
This is the header.
**Detailed Check of text:**
“In an action to recover the balance due on a promissory note, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Jamieson, J.), entered July 31, 2003, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and to sever its third affirmative defense and counterclaim, and granted that branch of the plaintiff‘s cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the third affirmative defense and counterclaim.”
“Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.”
“The Supreme Court correctly denied the defendant‘s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, in which it contended that the plaintiff sought to enforce a usurious transaction. Although the interest charged on the subject loan exceeded the criminal usury rate (see Penal Law § 190.40 ) and was therefore usurious without regard to the lender‘s intent (see Freitas v Geddes Sav. & Loan Assn., 63 NY2d 254, 262 [1984]; Fareri v Rain‘s Intl., 187 AD2d 481, 482 [1992]), the evidence, including the defendant‘s own deposition testimony, was sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant should be estopped from raising usury as a defense (see Seidel v 18 E. 17th St. Owners, 79 NY2d 735, 743 [1992]; Russo v Carey, 271 AD2d 889, 890 [2000]; Greenfield v Skydell, 186 AD2d 391 [1992]; Angelo v Brenner, 90 AD2d 131 [1982]; Hammond v Marrano, 88 AD2d 758, 760 [1982]).”
Page break 1052.
“The Supreme Court also correctly determined that the defendant, General Advisory & Funding Corp. (hereinafter GAF), was not the owner of the mortgage brokerage commission claim at the time it filed its answer and counterclaim seeking to recover the same. Since the claim belonged to GAF‘s president at the time he commenced a bankruptcy proceeding in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, the bankruptcy court has exclusive jurisdiction over the claim (see 28 USC § 1334 [e] ), and the Supreme Court properly declined to entertain it (see Hart Sys. v Arvee Sys., 244 AD2d 527 [1997]; Bromley v Fleet Bank, 240 AD2d 611 [1997]; Weiss v Goldfeder, 201 AD2d 644 [1994]). H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Ritter and Spolzino, JJ., concur.”
That seems to be the full opinion.
**Pagination Check:**
- Page 1 starts with the marble saddle case (part of 1051). I skip it.
- DeSantis header: `
` if not found.
Wait, I should check the judges in the first case to confirm court. “Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Mastro and Rivera” are AD2 judges. “H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Ritter and Spolzino” are also AD2 judges. So Court is N.Y. App. Div.
Let‘s begin.