People v. Diaz

Dec 10, 2009
Versions:68 A.D.3d 497
889 N.Y.S.2d 448
889 N.Y.2d 448
pink The user wants a legal opinion document converted into clean, semantic HTML. 1. **Analyze the Input:** * The provided document contains multiple case summaries or short opinions from the New York Appellate Division Reports. * Page 1 ends a case (Gonzalez P.J., etc.), starts “Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al.“, and ends it. Then starts “The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alfred Diaz, Appellant.” * Page 2 continues the Diaz case and starts “In the Matter of Deivi R. and Others...“. * Per instructions: “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.” * The document starts mid-opinion (page 497). The first full opinion starting on page 497 is “Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. [889 NYS2d 448]“. * The instruction says “If the document contains multiple opinions... convert only the MAIN opinion“. Usually, this means the first one that is complete. “Nella Manko” seems complete (caption, body, concurrences). * Wait, the “Nella Manko” opinion is very short. Is there a “MAIN” opinion? Usually, in these reporter pages, each bolded name starts a new opinion. * Let‘s look at the “Nella Manko” case. It has a caption, body, and signature block (concurrence list). * Let‘s look at the “People v Diaz” case. It starts at the bottom of 497 and continues to 498. * The instructions say: “If the document contains multiple opinions... convert only the MAIN opinion... Skip partial content from a previous case“. * Actually, the “Nella Manko” case is the first complete case in the provided PDF. 2. **Case Info for “Nella Manko“:** * Case Name: Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. * Short Name: Manko v. Mannor * Citation: 889 NYS2d 448 (This is the reporter cite provided in brackets). * Docket: Not explicitly provided in the text snippet, but usually these short memos in the NY AD don‘t have a specific docket number in the reporter text unless provided. I‘ll look for it. It‘s not there. * Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division (implied by the judges and reporter style, but usually “First Department” based on judges like Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, etc.). Looking at the judges (Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels), this is the First Department. * Date: Not explicitly in the snippet, but the Manko case mentions a 2008 ruling and is in 889 NYS2d. I‘ll check if a date is on the page. It‘s not. I will use the year mentioned or omit if not found. Wait, the Insurance Law section above mentions Jan 17, 2009. These cases are likely 2009 or 2010. Without the date, I‘ll omit the `midpage-date` attribute or use the year from the citation if possible. Actually, I‘ll just omit if it‘s not on the provided pages. 3. **Pagination:** * Starts at 497. * Manko case is entirely on 497. 4. **Formatting:** * Case caption: Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. [889 NYS2d 448] * Body text starts “The alleged medical malpractice occurred in 2002...” * Citations: * CPLR 214-a * DiMitri v Monsouri, 302 AD2d 420 [2003] * Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008], lv denied 13 NY3d 704 [2009] * Concurrence/Signature block: Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ. 5. **Multi-Opinion Handling:** * The prompt says “If the document contains multiple opinions... convert only the MAIN opinion“. * Looking at the screenshot, these are “memorandum orders” from a reporter. “Nella Manko” is the first complete one. “People v Diaz” starts right after it. * Usually, for reporter pages, I should pick the first full case. * Let‘s check “Nella Manko“. 6. **Attributes/Tags for Manko Case:** * `shortName=“Manko v. Mannor“` * `court=“N.Y. App. Div.“` (Bluebook for NY Appellate Division). * `midpage-citation`: 889 NYS2d 448 * Law Citations: * CPLR 214-a -> `CPLR 214-a` * Case Citations: * `DiMitri v Monsouri, 302 AD2d 420 [2003]` -> `DiMitri v Monsouri, 302 AD2d 420 [2003]` * `Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008]` -> `Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008]` * `lv denied 13 NY3d 704 [2009]` -> `lv denied 13 NY3d 704 [2009]` 7. **Refining “Main Opinion“:** * The first text block on page 497 is the tail end of a case (concluded with judges). * The second text block is “Nella Manko...“. * The third is “People v Diaz...“. * The fourth is “Matter of Deivi R...“. * I will treat “Nella Manko” as the main opinion to convert. 8. **Wait, looking at the OCR/Screenshot for Diaz:** * “The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alfred Diaz, Appellant. [889 NYS2d 448]” starts at the bottom of 497 and ends near the top of 498. * Actually, both Manko and Diaz have the same citation [889 NYS2d 448]? No, let me look closer at the OCR. * OCR says `[889 NYS2d 448]` for Manko. * OCR says `[889 NYS2d 448]` for Diaz too. This is likely a mistake in the OCR or they are part of a list of summary decisions. * Usually, if I have a document like this, I convert the first full case provided. 9. **Detailed Citation Analysis for “Nella Manko“:** * `shortName=“Manko v. Mannor“` * `court=“N.Y. App. Div.“` (Bluebook for N.Y. Supreme Court, Appellate Division). * `cite=“889 N.Y.S.2d 448“` * Law: CPLR 214-a. Jurisdiction NY. N.Y. C.P.L.R. 214-a. * Judges for signature: Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ. Let‘s double check if I should do the “Diaz” case instead? “Nella Manko” is completely contained on page 497 (except for the preceding text). Diaz spans 497-498. “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.” I‘ll stick with Nella Manko as it‘s the first complete opinion. Wait, looking at the layout, these are short summary orders. I will provide the “Nella Manko” case. Actually, the instruction “Multi-Opinion Documents: If the document contains multiple opinions... convert only the MAIN opinion” often implies there‘s one significant one or the first one. I‘ll process the Manko case. Wait, looking at the images, the Manko case starts after a block of text that is clearly the end of another case. The Manko case has: - Caption - Text - Judges block The Diaz case has: - Caption - Text - Judges block The Manko case is very short. Let‘s re-read: “convert only the MAIN opinion — the one with a complete case caption and full opinion body.” In reporter snippets, “Main” usually refers to the first one that is complete. One more thing: The Manko case and the Diaz case have the same page citation in the OCR? Looking at the screenshot, they both have [889 NYS2d 448]. This happens in some reporters for memorandum entries. Let‘s do “Nella Manko“. **Case Information Extraction:** - Case Name: Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. - shortName: Manko v. Mannor - Citation: 889 NYS2d 448 - Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division (Bluebook: N.Y. App. Div.) - Judges: Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ. - Date: Not visible on the page, but AD2d citations for 2008/2009 are referenced. I‘ll check the header if there‘s one. The header is redacted. I will omit date if not found. Wait, looking at the judges, this is the First Department. Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels. Let‘s look at the judges for the previous case: Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels. It seems like a list of decisions from the same day/panel. I‘ll output Nella Manko. **Re-reading the “Diaz” section:** The People... [889 NYS2d 448] (end of page 497) (page 498) As the People concede... It‘s longer. Maybe that‘s the “Main” one? No, the Manko one is fully presented. I will proceed with the Nella Manko case. Wait, let‘s look at the citation again. “889 NYS2d 448” is at the end of the caption for Manko. Then at the end of the caption for Diaz, it also says “889 NYS2d 448“. This indicates these are likely entries in a table or short memorandum decision list. Let‘s refine the HTML for Nella Manko. **Tags:** `` `` `

The alleged medical malpractice occurred in 2002 and the action was not commenced until July 2007, which was well beyond the 21/2-year statute of limitations (CPLR 214-a). Additionally, the complaint failed to state a cause of action against defendant Strauss (see DiMitri v Monsouri, 302 AD2d 420 [2003]), and the claims against Mannor, Lubin and Tikotsky are barred by the doctrine of res judicata in light of our 2008 ruling (Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008], lv denied 13 NY3d 704 [2009]) affirming the dismissal of a similarly belated earlier action against those defendants.

` `

We have considered plaintiff‘s remaining arguments, and find them unavailing. Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

` Wait, “Manzanet-Daniels” has a hyphen. OCR had a space in the second paragraph (“DeGrasse And Manzanet-Daniels“). I must stick to the text in the image. Image: “DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.” Second occurrence in OCR: “DeGrasse And Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.” (note the capital ‘A’ in ‘And’ and space instead of hyphen in one place? no, it‘s a hyphen in the image). The OCR has “DeGrasse And” which is a capitalization error. I will use the correct text from the image. OCR for first case: “DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.” OCR for Manko case: “DeGrasse And Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.” Image for Manko case: “DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.” (The ‘a’ in ‘and’ is lowercase). I will use lowercase ‘and‘. **Check Citations again:** `DiMitri v Monsouri, 302 AD2d 420 [2003]` `Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008]` `13 NY3d 704 [2009]` Wait, the prompt asks for “clean, semantic HTML while preserving all content exactly.” Content after the case info: “The alleged medical malpractice...” Is there any prefatory material? The case name and citation. I put those in Case Info. Is there a signature block? The “Concur — ...” line functions as the signature block here. I‘ll format it as a `div class=“midpage-signature“`. Wait, the instruction says: “If the document contains multiple opinions... convert only the MAIN opinion“. Usually, the “Main” opinion is the first one that has a full caption and text. Is Diaz better? It crosses a page. I‘ll provide the Manko one as it‘s the first full one. **Law Citations:** CPLR 214-a -> NY statute. `N.Y. C.P.L.R. 214-a`. **Case Citations:** `Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008], lv denied 13 NY3d 704 [2009]` This is a citation followed by a subsequent history citation. `Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008], lv denied 13 NY3d 704 [2009]` One detail: “21/2-year“. The source text uses superscript. I will use ``. Let‘s review the signature block for Manko. “Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.” The dash in the image looks like an em-dash or en-dash. I‘ll use `—` or similar if appropriate, or just a hyphen if that‘s what‘s there. It looks like a long dash. Wait, looking at the screenshot for Diaz... it‘s just as complete. But Manko comes first. Final check on attributes: - `shortName=“Manko v. Mannor“` - `cite=“889 NYS2d 448“` - `court=“N.Y. App. Div.“` (Bluebook says N.Y. App. Div. for the Appellate Division). Actually, the page is from the First Department (judges). I‘ll use “N.Y. App. Div.” as the court code. One more thing: the pagination. The page is 497. The Manko case starts on page 497. Is there any other metadata? “Appellant“, “Respondents“, “Defendants” are in the case name. “889 NYS2d 448” is the citation. Final structure: `` `` `

The alleged medical malpractice...

` `

We have considered plaintiff‘s...

` `
` `

Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

` `
` Wait, “Concur—...” is often just the last paragraph in these short AD reports. I‘ll keep it as a paragraph. One check: the previous case mentions “Insurance Law § 3420 (a)“. That‘s a law citation. But that case is partial (ends at top of 497). I skip it. Citations to check: `DiMitri v Monsouri, 302 AD2d 420 [2003]` `Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008]` `13 NY3d 704 [2009]` These are New York state cases. `AD2d` is Appellate Division, 2nd series. `AD3d` is 3rd series. `NY3d` is Court of Appeals, 3rd series. Citation for Manko: `889 NYS2d 448`. This is New York Supplement, 2nd series. Let‘s verify the Law Citation for CPLR. `N.Y. C.P.L.R. 214-a`. Jurisdiction `NY`. Let‘s double check “Manzanet-Daniels“. OCR has “Manzanet-Daniels“. Image has “Manzanet-Daniels“. Yes. One more thing: The Manko case name is: `Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.` Short name: `Manko v. Mannor` The OCR has `2V2-year`. This is a misreading of `2 1/2-year`. I will use `21/2-year`. Wait, the prompt says “If input is not a legal opinion, return only: `null`“. These are legal opinions (memorandum decisions). Wait, the instruction says “Multi-Opinion Documents: ... convert only the MAIN opinion“. Is Diaz “Main“? It‘s slightly longer and spans pages. However, “Nella Manko” is a full, distinct entry. I will stick with the first full one. Actually, looking at the layout, these are just short entries. I will process “Nella Manko“. Wait, I should check if “Nella Manko” is just a summary of a larger opinion. In NY Appellate reports, these “Memoranda” are the opinions. Final review of HTML constraints: - No code fences. - No commentary. - Raw HTML. - Straight quotes. - `midpage-ps` at the start. - `midpage-case` for case cites. - `midpage-law` for law cites. - `midpage-fnmark` and `midpage-fn` if any (none in this case). Wait, “lv denied” is a procedural phrase. `lv denied 13 NY3d 704 [2009]` Actually, `lv denied` is “leave denied“, which is the Supreme Court/Court of Appeals equivalent of “cert denied“. I should wrap it correctly. Usually, I wrap the citation. One more thing: “DiMitri v Monsouri“. The OCR says “DiMitri“. The image says “DiMitri“. Correct. Case Name: `Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.` The citation `[889 NYS2d 448]` is at the end. Is there any other metadata? The judges are listed as Concurring. Let‘s check the Diaz case too. “The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alfred Diaz, Appellant.” It‘s just as “main“. But Manko is first. Wait, I‘ll check if Manko is just a one-paragraph summary. It‘s two paragraphs. I will provide Manko. Wait, looking at the text: “in light of our 2008 ruling (Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008]...)” This confirms “Manko v Mannor” is the case name. Final code check: `cite=“302 AD2d 420“` `cite=“55 AD3d 471“` `cite=“13 NY3d 704“` `cite=“889 NYS2d 448“` Court for AD: `N.Y. App. Div.` Court for NY: `N.Y.` (Court of Appeals). One last look at the “Manzanet-Daniels” line. OCR: `DeGrasse And Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.` Image: `DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.` I will use the image‘s “and“. Wait, “CPLR 214-a“. The OCR says `CPLR 214-a`. The image shows a space. `CPLR 214-a`. Law cite: `jurisdiction=“NY” cite=“N.Y. C.P.L.R. 214-a“` The fraction: `21/2`. Let‘s check the dash in “Concur—...“. It is a long dash. `—` is appropriate or just the character `—`. I‘ll use `—`. Is there a date? No date on page. I will omit `midpage-date`. One detail: `shortName`. Bluebook says “Manko v. Mannor“. (Omit et al., procedural phrases). Wait, the OCR for the first paragraph of Manko says `2V2-year`. It‘s clearly 2 1/2. `CPLR 214-a`. One more thing: `midpage-case` attributes. `date=“2003“` `date=“2008“` `date=“2009“` Ready. Wait, I should check if there are any other law citations. “doctrine of res judicata” - no. “statute of limitations” - no. “CPLR 214-a” - yes. Wait, “DiMitri v Monsouri, 302 AD2d 420 [2003]“. In Bluebook, citations like this usually have parentheses, but New York reporters use brackets for the year. I will preserve the brackets in the inner text and use the year in the `date` attribute. Wait, looking at the Diaz case... it also has a caption and is an opinion. If I have to choose “the” main one, usually the first complete one is best. Wait, “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.” These are both “Main” in the sense they are full memorandum opinions. I will provide the first one. Wait, I‘ll check the “People v Diaz” case again. Caption on 497. Body on 498. It‘s longer. If the prompt implies only ONE opinion per output, and there are many, I‘ll provide the first one. One catch: “Skip partial content from a previous case that appears at the beginning of the document.” This refers to the text starting “accident was not an adequate inquiry...“. Final check on “Nella Manko” citation. OCR: `[889 NYS2d 448]` Image: `[889 NYS2d 448]` The Diaz case has the same. This likely refers to the page in the N.Y.S.2d reporter where these memorandum decisions start. Wait, looking at the 497 page, “Nella Manko” starts on a new line with a blocky separator. Actually, the blocky separator (black square) indicates a new entry. One detail: “2 1/2-year“. The fraction looks like a single character in some fonts, but usually written as `2 1/2` or with a superscript. Looking at the image, it‘s `2` followed by a small `1/2`. I will use `21/2` or `21/2`. `21/2` is cleaner. One more thing: the signature line `Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., ...`. In the OCR for the preceding case, it says `Concur —Gonzalez...`. In the Manko case, it says `Concur —Gonzalez...`. There‘s a space before the em-dash. Actually, it looks like `Concur—` (no space) or `Concur —`. I‘ll use `Concur—`. Wait, “DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.” The punctuation at the end is a period. Okay, I‘m ready. Wait, `midpage-citation` - I‘ll put `889 NYS2d 448`. Final verification: - `midpage-ps n=“497“` - Case Name in `Case Information`. - Body text. - Case and Law citations tagged. - Straight quotes. - No commentary. One small check: “defendant Strauss“. OCR has “Strauss“. Image has “Strauss“. “Mannor, Lubin and Tikotsky“. OCR has “Mannor, Lubin and Tikotsky“. Image has “Mannor, Lubin and Tikotsky“. Wait, I should check if there‘s any other “MAIN” opinion. Usually, a PDF might be a single case. If it‘s a reporter page, there are many. The instruction: “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.” This strongly suggests I pick the first full one. ```html

The alleged medical malpractice occurred in 2002 and the action was not commenced until July 2007, which was well beyond the 21/2-year statute of limitations (CPLR 214-a). Additionally, the complaint failed to state a cause of action against defendant Strauss (see DiMitri v Monsouri, 302 AD2d 420 [2003]), and the claims against Mannor, Lubin and Tikotsky are barred by the doctrine of res judicata in light of our 2008 ruling (Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008], lv denied 13 NY3d 704 [2009]) affirming the dismissal of a similarly belated earlier action against those defendants.

We have considered plaintiff‘s remaining arguments, and find them unavailing. Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

``` Wait, the snippet for Diaz is also complete. But Manko is the “first complete“. Actually, often when a user provides 2 pages, they might want the case that spans those pages if it‘s the “Main” one. Diaz starts at bottom of 497 and ends at top of 498. Manko is entirely on 497. “Matter of Deivi R.” starts on 498 and doesn‘t finish. So Diaz is the most “complete” spanning multiple pages? No, “Nella Manko” is complete. I‘ll stick with Nella Manko. Wait, let‘s look at the judges again. “Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.” These are the First Department judges. I should specify First Department in the court name if possible, or just “N.Y. App. Div.” for the code. The name: `Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York`. Wait, the OCR for “Diaz” has the same citation. Actually, looking at page 497, the Diaz caption is at the bottom. The Manko opinion text ends before the Diaz caption. So Manko is a complete case. I will provide Nella Manko. One correction: `shortName`. Bluebook Rule 10.2.1: Omit “et al.” and “Appellant“, “Respondent“. `Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al.` -> `Manko v. Mannor`. CPLR: `Civil Practice Law and Rules`. Standard citation is `CPLR 214-a`. Jurisdiction: `NY`. Cite: `N.Y. C.P.L.R. 214-a`. Wait, the prompt asks for “Clean, semantic HTML“. I‘ll use a `div class=“midpage-signature“` for the judges line if it looks like a signature block, but here it‘s part of the last paragraph in the reporter. I‘ll just leave it as a paragraph. One last check on the image for Diaz. “As the People concede, a remand is necessary...” It‘s a memorandum decision. I‘ll stick with Manko. Wait, what if the user wants Diaz because it shows the transition between pages? Actually, the instruction “convert only the MAIN opinion” usually refers to the most substantial or first complete one. Manko is the first complete one. Wait, checking the OCR: “DeGrasse And Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.” (Manko case) “DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.” (People v Diaz case) Actually, in the image for Manko, it is “DeGrasse and” (lowercase). OCR has “And“. I will use “and“. Wait, I missed one case cite in the Diaz case. `People v Rampino, 55 AD3d 348 [2008]` And law cite: `DLRA`. (Drug Law Reform Act). If I were to do Diaz: It spans 497-498. It has a case name: `The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alfred Diaz, Appellant.` Citation: `889 NYS2d 448`. Text on 497: None. Caption only. Wait! Look at the image of 497. The caption for Diaz is at the bottom. The text for Diaz starts on 498. So the Diaz opinion is not even on 497. “Nella Manko” is the ONLY full opinion on page 497. Therefore, “Nella Manko” is the main opinion for the first part. However, often “Main” means the one the PDF is centered around. But I don‘t know that. I‘ll provide Nella Manko. Wait, `lv denied` - is that a separate case tag? `Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008], lv denied 13 NY3d 704 [2009]` This is a citation of the original case + subsequent history. I will wrap each as a ``. Final check on `midpage-law`. `CPLR 214-a`. Jurisdiction: `NY`. Cite: `N.Y. C.P.L.R. 214-a`. Double check “2 1/2-year“. It‘s `2 1/2-year`. HTML: `21/2-year`. Check hyphen/dash in Concur line. `Concur—Gonzalez`. Wait, the image shows a space before “Gonzalez“. Actually, it looks like `Concur —Gonzalez`. I‘ll use `Concur — Gonzalez`. Let‘s look at the image again. `Concur —Gonzalez, P.J., ...` There is a space before the dash. No space after? Actually, it looks like `Concur — Gonzalez`. (Spaces on both sides). Wait, no, it looks like `Concur —Gonzalez`. I‘ll follow the visual: `Concur — Gonzalez`. Wait, I will look at the previous case‘s concur line. `Concur —Gonzalez, P.J., ...` It looks like `Concur` + space + em-dash + no space + name. `Concur —Gonzalez`. Okay, I‘ll go with that. One more thing: `midpage-citation`. The cite in the brackets is `889 NYS2d 448`. Final HTML structure: - details - midpage-ps 497 - p (paragraph 1) - p (paragraph 2) Wait, the concur line is the last sentence of the second paragraph. “We have considered... unavailing. Concur—Gonzalez...” I‘ll keep it as one paragraph. Final check on party names. `Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.` OCR: `Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al., Respon dents, et al., Defendants.` Note: `Respondents` was hyphenated in the OCR because it broke a line in the reporter. I will rejoin: `Respondents`. Final Check on Law Citations: CPLR 214-a is indeed N.Y. Civil Practice Law and Rules § 214-a. ```html Case Information Nella Manko, Appellant, v Dana Mannor et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York 889 NYS2d 448 The alleged medical malpractice occurred in 2002 and the action was not commenced until July 2007, which was well beyond the 21/2-year statute of limitations (CPLR 214-a). Additionally, the complaint failed to state a cause of action against defendant Strauss (see DiMitri v Monsouri, 302 AD2d 420 [2003]), and the claims against Mannor, Lubin and Tikotsky are barred by the doctrine of res judicata in light of our 2008 ruling (Manko v Mannor, 55 AD3d 471 [2008], lv denied 13 NY3d 704 [2009]) affirming the dismissal of a similarly belated earlier action against those defendants. We have considered plaintiff‘s remaining arguments, and find them unavailing. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ. ``` Wait, in the image, “Concur — Gonzalez” has a space before the dash. Image: `Concur — Gonzalez`? Let me zoom in on the Manko concurrence line. `Concur —Gonzalez` There is a space after “Concur“, then an em-dash, then no space before “Gonzalez“. Actually, it might be `Concur — Gonzalez` (spaces on both sides). Let‘s check the first case on 497. `Concur —Gonzalez` It looks like a space before the dash and no space after. I will use `Concur — Gonzalez`. Wait, “DeGrasse And Manzanet-Daniels” in the OCR. OCR: `DeGrasse And Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.` Image: `DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.` I‘ll use the lowercase “and“. One last thing: “21/2-year“. Image shows `21/2-year`. I will use the `` tag. The citation `[889 NYS2d 448]`. I‘ll include it in the `midpage-citation`. Done.