50 A.D.3d 650
N.Y. App. Div.
2008
Crowley throughts The user wants me to convert a legal document from a PDF/OCR source into a clean, semantic HTML format. The document contains three partial pages. - Page 1 starts with the end of one case and then begins a new case: “Galo Maliza et al., Respondents, v Puerto-Rican Transportation Corp. et al., Respondents, and Roberto Luna, Appellant. [854 NYS2d 763]“. - Page 2 continues the Maliza case. - Page 3 concludes the Maliza case and starts a new case: “Jerome McSorley, Respondent, v Kay L. Spear, Appellant. [854 NYS2d 759]“. Following the “Multi-Opinion Documents” rule: “If the document contains multiple opinions (e.g., end of one case and start of another), 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.” In this document: 1. The first paragraph on page 650 is the conclusion of an unnamed previous case. I should skip this. 2. The Maliza case starts on page 650 (bottom) and ends on page 652 (middle). 3. The McSorley case starts on page 652 (bottom) and is incomplete. The “main” opinion here is the Maliza case because it has a case title and a complete opinion text within the provided pages. **Case Information for Maliza:** - Case Name: Galo Maliza et al., Respondents, v Puerto-Rican Transportation Corp. et al., Respondents, and Roberto Luna, Appellant. - Short Name: Maliza v. Puerto-Rican Transportation Corp. - Citation: 854 N.Y.S.2d 763 (Note: the OCR also shows page numbers 650, 651, 652 which likely belong to the official reporter, probably AD3d, but the citation provided is NYS2d). - Docket: Not explicitly provided other than the citation. - Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York (Inferred from the judges Miller, J.P., Covello, Eng and Chambers, JJ., and the style of the citation/reporter). However, the metadata instructions say to extract data, don‘t repeat in body. - Date: The order appealed from is dated September 27, 2006. The decision date isn‘t explicitly at the top, but usually these are published together. I‘ll look for a specific date if available. Actually, the prompt says “Preserve formatting exactly“. The text says “In an action... defendant... appeals from an order... dated September 27, 2006“. The decision itself doesn‘t show its own date in the snippet, but usually it‘s later. I‘ll use the citation provided. **Structure:** 1. Case Information block. 2. Page marker ``. 3. Pre-opinion content: The caption/title. 4. Opinion body. 5. Signature block/Judges list. Wait, looking at the OCR for page 650: “Galo Maliza et al., Respondents, v Puerto-Rican Transportation Corp. et al., Respondents, and Roberto Luna, Appellant. [854 NYS2d 763]” This is the title of the Maliza case. OCR Page 651: “In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Roberto Luna appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jacobson, J.), dated September 27, 2006...” This is the start of the body. OCR Page 652: “... Miller, J.P., Covello, Eng and Chambers, JJ, concur.” This is the end of the Maliza case. Then a new case starts: “Jerome McSorley...“. I should stop after the Maliza case. **Citations in Maliza case:** - Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986] - Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1163 [a] - Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d at 324 - Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d 468, 468 [2007] - Exime v Williams, 45 AD3d 633 [2007] - Marcel v Chief Energy Corp., 38 AD3d 502 [2007] - Exime v Williams, 45 AD3d at 634 - Hull v Spagnoli, 44 AD3d 1007 [2007] - Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d at 468-469 - Bongiovi v Hoffman, 18 AD3d 686 [2005] - Hull v Spagnoli, 44 AD3d at 1007 - McCain v Larosa, 41 AD3d 792, 793 [2007] - Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d at 468-469 - Morgan v Hachmann, 9 AD3d 400, 400 [2004] - Exime v Williams, 45 AD3d at 633-634 - McCain v Larosa, 41 AD3d at 793 - Mateiasevici v Daccordo, 34 AD3d 651, 652 [2006] - Cox v Nunez, 23 AD3d 427 [2005] - Hull v Spagnoli, 44 AD3d at 1007 - Mateiasevici v Daccordo, 34 AD3d at 652 - Klein v Byalik, 1 AD3d 399 [2003] - Gravina v Wakschal, 255 AD2d 291, 291-292 [1998] - Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1140 (a) - Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 149, 1140 [c] - Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1142 and 1172 - Le Claire v Pratt, 270 AD2d 612, 613 [2000] - Crespo v New York City Hous. Auth., 222 AD2d 300 [1995] **Normalization for Law Citations:** - N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law. The text says “Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1163 [a]“. I should use jurisdiction=“NY” and cite=“N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 1163(a)“. **Refining the Case Info:** - Case name: GALO MALIZA et al., Respondents, v PUERTO-RICAN TRANSPORTATION CORP. et al., Respondents, and ROBERTO LUNA, Appellant. - shortName: Maliza v. Puerto-Rican Transportation Corp. - Citation: 854 N.Y.S.2d 763 - Court: N.Y. App. Div. (based on AD3d citations and the style) - Judges: Miller, J.P.; Covello, Eng and Chambers, JJ. Let‘s double check the start of the Maliza case. It begins on page 650 after a horizontal rule. The text on page 650 before Maliza is from a different case. Page 650: Bottom part: “GALO MALIZA et al., Respondents, v PUERTO-RICAN TRANSPORTATION CORP. et al., Respondents, and ROBERTO LUNA, Appellant. [854 NYS2d 763]” Then follows on 651: “In an action to recover damages...” Wait, looking at page 650, there is a square bullet before “GALO MALIZA“. This usually marks the start of a new case in these reporters. I will skip the first three paragraphs on page 650. Page 651 is almost entirely the Maliza case. Page 652 has the conclusion of Maliza and the start of McSorley. So the main opinion is Maliza. One detail: The prompt says “Place at word boundaries, not mid-word“. On page 650, the Maliza case starts near the bottom. The citation “[854 NYS2d 763]” is at the end of the caption. Actually, page 651 starts with “In an action...“. Page 652 starts with “at 468-469; Bongiovi...“. This is part of a string citation. The citation “Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d” ends on page 651 and “at 468-469” starts on 652. Let‘s check the word break between 651 and 652. End of 651: “Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d” Start of 652: “at 468-469” The case name Gergis v Miccio is on 651, the pinpoint is on 652. Another break: Between 650 and 651. End of 650: “[854 NYS2d 763]--” (Note the em-dash or separator) Start of 651: “In an action...” Actually, the OCR for page 650 ends with `[854 NYS2d 763]`. Page 651 starts with `In an action...`. The screenshot for 651 shows “651” at the top right. The screenshot for 650 shows “650” at the top left. Wait, page 650 has a solid black bar at the bottom. Page 651 has a solid black bar at the top. It looks like the Maliza case starts at the bottom of 650 and continues on 651. Wait, let‘s look at the images again. Page 650: The text “GALO MALIZA...” is at the bottom. Page 651: The text starts with “In an action...“. There is a block of black above “In an action“. This might be the redacted case header or just a separator. Looking at the flow: The square bullet before “GALO MALIZA” is the start. Let‘s check the “Multi-Opinion Documents” rule carefully. “If the document contains multiple opinions... convert only the MAIN opinion... skip partial content from a previous case that appears at the beginning of the document.” Paragraph 1-3 on page 650 are the end of a previous case (about NYCTA, truck driver, etc). I skip those. The main opinion starts with the caption of Maliza. **Law normalization for New York:** Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1163 [a] -> jurisdiction=“NY” cite=“N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 1163(a)” Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1140 (a) -> jurisdiction=“NY” cite=“N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 1140(a)” Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 149, 1140 [c] -> jurisdiction=“NY” cite=“N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 149” (Range/list, use first) Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1142 and 1172 -> jurisdiction=“NY” cite=“N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 1142” CPLR 3211 (a) (8) (in the McSorley case, but I‘m only doing Maliza. Wait, does Maliza mention laws? Yes, VTL.) Let‘s find the date for Maliza. The order appealed from is Sept 27, 2006. The decision date isn‘t visible. Usually, the citation 854 NYS2d 763 corresponds to a specific date. I will omit the `date` attribute in `midpage-date` if it‘s not on the page. Instructions say “Omit elements without data“. However, looking at the snippet, no decision date is present. I‘ll check if there‘s a footer or header. No. Wait, “dated September 27, 2006” is the date of the order *being appealed*. One more thing: The citation `[854 NYS2d 763]` is given. Let‘s look for case citations: 1. `Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d 468, 468 [2007]` 2. `Exime v Williams, 45 AD3d 633 [2007]` 3. `Marcel v Chief Energy Corp., 38 AD3d 502 [2007]` 4. `Exime v Williams, 45 AD3d at 634` (short form of #2) 5. `Hull v Spagnoli, 44 AD3d 1007 [2007]` 6. `Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d at 468-469` (short form of #1) 7. `Bongiovi v Hoffman, 18 AD3d 686 [2005]` 8. `McCain v Larosa, 41 AD3d 792, 793 [2007]` 9. `Morgan v Hachmann, 9 AD3d 400, 400 [2004]` 10. `Mateiasevici v Daccordo, 34 AD3d 651, 652 [2006]` 11. `Cox v Nunez, 23 AD3d 427 [2005]` 12. `Klein v Byalik, 1 AD3d 399 [2003]` 13. `Gravina v Wakschal, 255 AD2d 291, 291-292 [1998]` 14. `Le Claire v Pratt, 270 AD2d 612, 613 [2000]` 15. `Crespo v New York City Hous. Auth., 222 AD2d 300 [1995]` Court for these cases: AD2d, AD3d are N.Y. App. Div. Let‘s begin formatting. **Metadata:** Case Name: GALO MALIZA et al., Respondents, v PUERTO-RICAN TRANSPORTATION CORP. et al., Respondents, and ROBERTO LUNA, Appellant. shortName: Maliza v. Puerto-Rican Transportation Corp. Citation: 854 N.Y.S.2d 763 Court: N.Y. App. Div. (derived from AD reporter) Judges: Miller, J.P., Covello, Eng and Chambers, JJ. **Pagination:** Page 650 ends after `[854 NYS2d 763]--`. Page 651 starts with “In an action...“. Page 652 starts with “at 468-469; Bongiovi...“. Wait, I should check the line “Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d” at the end of 651. Screenshot 651 bottom: “Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d” Screenshot 652 top: “at 468-469; Bongiovi...” Yes, the split is after `39 AD3d`. Reflowing: “which col-lided” -> “which collided” “testi-fied” -> “testified” “pri-mary” (Wait, looking at the OCR... no, “sum-mary“?) Let‘s check “sum-mary” on page 651. Yes, “sum-mary judg-ment” -> “summary judgment“. “judg-ment” -> “judgment“. “compara-tively” -> “comparatively“. “Mate-iasevici” -> “Mateiasevici“. “intersec-tions” -> “intersections“. “New YorkCity” -> “New York City” (OCR error). Wait, the OCR for page 652 shows `(seeLe Claire v Pratt, 270`. There should be a space. I‘ll correct obvious OCR missing spaces between words like `see` and the case name, but keep word order. Actually, the instruction says “Preserve word order... matches source exactly.” Usually, “seeLe Claire” is an OCR typo for “see Le Claire“. I‘ll use “see Le Claire“. One detail in law normalization: “Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 149, 1140 [c]” -> `cite=“N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 149“` “Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1142 and 1172” -> `cite=“N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 1142“` The list of judges: “Miller, J.P., Covello, Eng and Chambers, JJ., concur.” Ready to write. Final check on the Maliza caption: “GALO MALIZA et al., Respondents, v PUERTO-RICAN TRANSPORTATION CORP. et al., Respondents, and ROBERTO LUNA, Appellant. [854 NYS2d 763]” The square bullet is a decoration or bullet, usually ignored or rendered as a bullet. I‘ll omit it as it‘s a layout element. The separator line `[854 NYS2d 763]--` has a trailing line. I will include the text. Wait, page 650 start. I start at Maliza. `` is placed right before the Maliza caption. Body: “In an action to recover damages...” “Ordered that the order is reversed...” “The plaintiffs were passengers...” “A driver who fails to yield...” “Here, Luna made a prima facie showing...” “at 468-469; Bongiovi v Hoffman...” “Furthermore, the plaintiffs’ contention...” Judges at the end of Maliza: “Miller, J.P., Covello, Eng and Chambers, JJ., concur.” Then there‘s another bullet and the start of McSorley. I stop there. One more law: `Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1142 (a)`. Normalization: `N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 1142(a)`. Case cites: - `Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d 468, 468 [2007]` -> `cite=“39 A.D.3d 468“`, `pinpoint=“468“`, `court=“N.Y. App. Div.“`, `date=“2007“`. (Note: AD3d is usually N.Y. App. Div., 2d Dept or similar. Without the specific department, I‘ll use “N.Y. App. Div.“). - `Exime v Williams, 45 AD3d 633 [2007]` -> `cite=“45 A.D.3d 633“`. - `Marcel v Chief Energy Corp., 38 AD3d 502 [2007]` -> `cite=“38 A.D.3d 502“`. - `Hull v Spagnoli, 44 AD3d 1007 [2007]` -> `cite=“44 A.D.3d 1007“`. - `Bongiovi v Hoffman, 18 AD3d 686 [2005]` -> `cite=“18 A.D.3d 686“`. - `McCain v Larosa, 41 AD3d 792, 793 [2007]` -> `cite=“41 A.D.3d 792“`. - `Morgan v Hachmann, 9 AD3d 400, 400 [2004]` -> `cite=“9 A.D.3d 400“`. - `Mateiasevici v Daccordo, 34 AD3d 651, 652 [2006]` -> `cite=“34 A.D.3d 651“`. - `Cox v Nunez, 23 AD3d 427 [2005]` -> `cite=“23 A.D.3d 427“`. - `Klein v Byalik, 1 AD3d 399 [2003]` -> `cite=“1 A.D.3d 399“`. - `Gravina v Wakschal, 255 AD2d 291, 291-292 [1998]` -> `cite=“255 A.D.2d 291“`. - `Le Claire v Pratt, 270 AD2d 612, 613 [2000]` -> `cite=“270 A.D.2d 612“`. - `Crespo v New York City Hous. Auth., 222 AD2d 300 [1995]` -> `cite=“222 A.D.2d 300“`. Wait, New York Appellate Division reporter is A.D., A.D.2d, A.D.3d. Bluebook for NY Appellate Division is “N.Y. App. Div.“. I will use that. Wait, for the case name: `Galo Maliza et al., Respondents, v Puerto-Rican Transportation Corp. et al., Respondents, and Roberto Luna, Appellant.` Short name: `Maliza v. Puerto-Rican Transportation Corp.` I‘ll start now. Wait, the citation in the prompt for Maliza is `[854 NYS2d 763]`. I‘ll include it in the `midpage-citation` tag. One correction: `Exime v Williams, 45 AD3d at 634` -> `type=“short“`, `pinpoint=“634“`. `Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d at 468-469` -> `type=“short“`, `pinpoint=“468-469“`. In the short forms, I should infer the starting page. Exime: 633. Gergis: 468. Hull: 1007. McCain: 792. Mateiasevici: 651. For `id.`: None found? Wait. Ah, `(see Exime v Williams, 45 AD3d at 634; Hull v Spagnoli, 44 AD3d 1007 [2007]; Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d at 468-469...` No `Id.` in this one. Wait, at the end of the text: `(see Le Claire v Pratt, 270 AD2d 612, 613 [2000]; Crespo v New York City Hous. Auth., 222 AD2d 300 [1995]).` No `Id.` here either. Wait, “We reverse.” followed by the quote. Then “Here, Luna made a prima facie showing...” Wait, checking for `Id.`. I don‘t see any in the OCR for Maliza. Wait, looking at the very end of Maliza: `Miller, J.P., Covello, Eng and Chambers, JJ., concur.` This looks like a signature/judge block. I‘ll use the signature block format. Let‘s check for Footnotes. None are visible in the Maliza snippets. Text of Maliza caption: “GALO MALIZA et al., Respondents, v PUERTO-RICAN TRANSPORTATION CORP. et al., Respondents, and ROBERTO LUNA, Appellant.” I will keep the caps. Final check on page boundaries. Page 650 caption: “GALO MALIZA et al., Respondents, v PUERTO-RICAN TRANSPORTATION CORP. et al., Respondents, and ROBERTO LUNA, Appellant. [854 NYS2d 763]” Then page break 651. Body of Maliza starts on 651. Wait, looking at the screenshots: Page 650 bottom: “Galo Maliza et al., Respondents, v Puerto-Rican Transportation Corp. et al., Respondents, and Roberto Luna, Appellant. [854 NYS2d 763]” Then a thick black line. Page 651 starts with another thick black line, then the body. This means the entire Maliza caption is on page 650. Let‘s begin.