SCG Architects v. Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP

Mar 15, 2011
Versions:82 A.D.3d 953
918 N.Y.2d 733
耳thought Expert legal document formatter. Clean, semantic HTML. Provided screenshots and OCR of a two-page legal document. * Omit partial content from a previous case (the top of page 1 is the end of *Ruffin v. Lion Corp.*). * Identify the main case(s). Here, the document shows the end of one case, and then two short opinions: *SCG Architects et al. v. Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP* and *Jacob Shafran v. Modesto Pineiro et al.* * The instructions say: “For multi-opinion documents, convert only the MAIN opinion — the one with a complete case caption and full opinion body.” * Looking at the document: * Page 1 starts with the end of *Ruffin v. Lion Corp.* (Skip this per instructions: “Skip partial content from a previous case that appears at the beginning of the document.“) * Page 1 then has *SCG Architects et al. v. Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP*. This has a caption and a body. It continues onto page 2 and ends with a signature block/concurrence line. * Page 2 then starts *Jacob Shafran v. Modesto Pineiro et al.* which also has a caption and body. * Constraint Check: “If the document contains multiple opinions... convert only the MAIN opinion — the one with a complete case caption and full opinion body.” Since *SCG Architects* is the first complete opinion starting in the document, I will focus on that one. * **Case 1: *SCG Architects et al. v. Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP*** * Name: SCG Architects et al., Respondents, v Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP, Appellant. * Short Name: SCG Architects v. Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP * Citation: 918 NYS2d 733 (actually [918 NYS2d 733]) * Court: Not explicitly stated in caption, but based on the reporter (AD3d/NYS2d) and judges (Skelos, J.P., etc.), it‘s the NY Supreme Court, Appellate Division (Second Department, given the judges like Skelos/Florio). However, I should use what‘s in the text or standard abbreviations. The header on the page says “953” and “954“. * Date: Not explicitly on these pages. Usually, for these NY reports, the date is elsewhere. I will look for clues. The previous case citation says “[2010]“. The *SCG* body cites cases from 2010. I will look at the provided text. The OCR for the next case has “918NYS2d780“. The *SCG* one is “[918 NYS2d 733]“. I don‘t see a specific date for *SCG*. Wait, usually in these types of outputs, if the date isn‘t visible, I omit the attribute or use what I can infer. I will check if the date is in the text. No. I will omit `date` or use the year from the citation if available. * Docket: Not listed. * Judge: Skelos, J.P., Florio, Leventhal and Hall, JJ. * Wait, let‘s re-read the “Multi-Opinion” rule. “If the document contains multiple opinions... convert only the MAIN opinion... skip partial content...“. I will convert *SCG Architects*. * **Case 2: *Jacob Shafran v. Modesto Pineiro et al.*** * This starts after the *SCG* opinion concludes. * Since the prompt says “convert the provided legal document“, and provides two full opinions (well, *SCG* is full, *Shafran* starts), I should probably stick to the first complete one found (*SCG*). * `midpage-case-name`: SCG ARCHITECTS et al., Respondents, v SMITH, BUSS & JACOBS, LLP, Appellant. * `shortName`: SCG Architects v. Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP * `midpage-citation`: 918 NYS2d 733 * `midpage-court` (inferred from judges/reporter): N.Y. App. Div. * Page 1: 953 * Page 2: 954 * `` * Caption: SCG ARCHITECTS et al., Respondents, v SMITH, BUSS & JACOBS, LLP, Appellant. [918 NYS2d 733] * Body paragraphs. * Citations: * `CPLR 3025 [b]` -> `CPLR 3025 [b]` * `Rector v City of New York, 74 AD3d 771, 772 [2010]` -> `Rector v City of New York, 74 AD3d 771, 772 [2010]` * `Summit at Pomona, Ltd. v Village of Pomona, 72 AD3d 797, 799 [2010]` -> `Summit at Pomona, Ltd. v Village of Pomona, 72 AD3d 797, 799 [2010]` * `Lucido v Mancuso, 49 AD3d 220, 229 [2008]` -> `Lucido v Mancuso, 49 AD3d 220, 229 [2008]` * `CPLR 2221 [e] [2]` -> `CPLR 2221 [e] [2]` * `Garfinkle Ltd. Partnership II v 11 Mecox Bay Inn, Inc., 52 AD3d 467 [2008]` -> `Garfinkle Ltd. Partnership II v 11 Mecox Bay Inn, Inc., 52 AD3d 467 [2008]` * `Kletke v GOS Corp., 51 AD3d 875 [2008]` -> `Kletke v GOS Corp., 51 AD3d 875 [2008]` * `Worthy v Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr., 50 AD3d 1023, 1024 [2008]` -> `Worthy v Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr., 50 AD3d 1023, 1024 [2008]` * `Skelos, J.P., Florio, Leventhal and Hall, JJ., concur.` -> This is actually the judges for the *Ruffin* case above. * The judges for *SCG* are: `Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.` (Bottom of *SCG* text on page 2). * Wait, let‘s look at the layout carefully. * End of *Ruffin*: “Skelos, J.P., Florio, Leventhal and Hall, JJ., concur.” * Horizontal bar. * Caption: SCG Architects et al., Respondents, v SMITH, BUSS & JACOBS, LLP, Appellant. [918 NYS2d 733] * Text starts: “The Supreme Court providently exercised...” * Page 2 continues the *SCG* text. * *SCG* concludes: “Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.” * Horizontal bar. * Caption: Jacob Shafran, Appellant, v MODESTO PINEIRO et al., Respondents. [918 NYS2d 780] * Text starts: “The plaintiff buyer...” * Okay, I will extract *SCG Architects* as the main opinion. * *Self-Correction on Citations*: Use Bluebook abbreviations for courts. NY Appellate Division is “N.Y. App. Div.” or similar. I‘ll use “N.Y. App. Div.” as per common usage. * Law citations: `CPLR 3025 [b]` is the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules. Jurisdiction=“NY“. Cite=“N.Y. C.P.L.R. 3025(b)“. ```html

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the defendant‘s motion which was for leave to amend its answer to assert the affirmative defense of res judicata, as the proposed amendment was patently devoid of merit (see CPLR 3025 [b]; Rector v City of New York, 74 AD3d 771, 772 [2010]; Summit at Pomona, Ltd. v Village of Pomona, 72 AD3d 797, 799 [2010]; Lucido v Mancuso, 49 AD3d 220, 229 [2008]).

The Supreme Court also properly denied that branch of the defendant‘s motion which was for leave to renew its prior motion, as the new facts proffered would not have changed the prior determination (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]; Garfinkle Ltd. Partnership II v 11 Mecox Bay Inn, Inc., 52 AD3d 467 [2008]; Kletke v GOS Corp., 51 AD3d 875 [2008]; Worthy v Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr., 50 AD3d 1023, 1024 [2008]).

The defendant‘s remaining contentions are without merit.

Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.

``` *Check Page Break*: The break happens in “Garfinkle Ltd. / Partnership II“. OCR: `Garfinkle Ltd. [break] Partnership II` HTML: `Garfinkle Ltd. Partnership II` *Citation pins*: Rector: 772. Summit: 799. Lucido: 229. Worthy: 1024. *Short Name check*: “SCG Architects v. Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP” *Court check*: The judges Rivera, Dickerson, Eng, and Lott were members of the Appellate Division, Second Department in 2011 (which is when 918 NYS2d 733 was published). *Date check*: The citation `[918 NYS2d 733]` doesn‘t have a year next to it, and there‘s no year on the page. However, the cases cited are from 2008 and 2010. 918 NYS2d is roughly 2011. I‘ll check the instruction: “Preserve formatting exactly (dates...)“. If not provided, omit. I don‘t see a clear date for this specific case on the page. I will omit the `date` attribute for the Case Information. Wait, the rule: “If the document contains multiple opinions... convert only the MAIN opinion“. Usually, this means the first one that is complete. *SCG Architects* fits. One detail: The OCR for *SCG Architects* ends with Rivera... concur. The next opinion *Shafran* starts below a horizontal line. Let‘s double check the OCR vs text for *SCG Architects*. OCR for page 1: `SCG Architects et al., Respondents, v Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP,Appellant. [918 NYS2d 733]` `The Supreme Court providently exercised...` `The Supreme Court also properly denied...` OCR for page 2: `Partnership II v 11 Mecox Bay Inn, Inc., 52 AD3d 467 [2008];` `Kletke v GOS Corp., 51 AD3d 875 [2008]; Worthy v Good` `Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr., 50 AD3d 1023, 1024 [2008]).` `The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit.` `Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.` This looks like a complete short opinion (Memorandum Decision). I‘ll ensure I don‘t include the *Ruffin* text at the start of page 1. I‘ll ensure I don‘t include the *Shafran* text starting on page 2. One tiny correction: The OCR has “SCG Architects et al.” but the image shows “SCG ARCHITECTS et al.“. I will follow the image for casing where possible, but the prompt says “Preserve all content exactly“. The screenshot is the source of truth. Image for SCG: “SCG ARCHITECTS et al., Respondents, v SMITH, BUSS & JACOBS, LLP, Appellant. [918 NYS2d 733]” Note: “ARCHITECTS” and “SMITH, BUSS & JACOBS, LLP” are in small caps/all caps. I will use all caps. Let‘s review the signature block. It‘s not a standard District Judge block but a list of concurring justices. The format: ```html

Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.

``` This matches the content. Wait, should I include the [918 NYS2d 733] in the body or just the case info? Instructions: “Include ALL content before the main opinion text... extract metadata here, don‘t repeat in body“. The caption is the content before the text. “SCG ARCHITECTS et al... [918 NYS2d 733]” is the caption. It goes in Case Info. The text starts with “The Supreme Court...“. Final Check on Law Citations: - CPLR 3025 [b] -> N.Y. C.P.L.R. 3025(b) - CPLR 2221 [e] [2] -> N.Y. C.P.L.R. 2221(e)(2) Jurisdiction=“NY“. Final Check on Case Citations: - Rector v City of New York, 74 AD3d 771, 772 [2010] - Summit at Pomona, Ltd. v Village of Pomona, 72 AD3d 797, 799 [2010] - Lucido v Mancuso, 49 AD3d 220, 229 [2008] - Garfinkle Ltd. Partnership II v 11 Mecox Bay Inn, Inc., 52 AD3d 467 [2008] - Kletke v GOS Corp., 51 AD3d 875 [2008] - Worthy v Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr., 50 AD3d 1023, 1024 [2008] All appear to be N.Y. App. Div. (AD3d). *Wait*, the page number 953/954 is the reporter page. The citation is 918 NYS2d 733. 733 is the starting page of the case. The page I‘m looking at starts with 953. This is from a different reporter (likely Official Reports AD3d). The citation provided in the bracket is the parallel citation [918 NYS2d 733]. The official citation is likely 81 AD3d 919 (I happen to know this case, but I should look at the text provided). The text doesn‘t explicitly provide the AD3d citation, only the NYS2d parallel. I will stick to what‘s in the text. One instruction: “Page number priority: 1. ECF... 2. Reporter... 3. Internal“. The numbers “953” and “954” at the top are reporter page numbers (AD3d). I will use those. *Rejoining hyphens*: “ad-ditional” on page 1 (in the Ruffin case, but I‘m skipping that). “motion” on page 1/2 “mo-tion“. Rejoin: “motion“. “defend-ants” on page 2 (Shafran case). Wait, “mo-tion” is at the end of page 1. OCR: `prior mo-` OCR Page 2: `tion, as the new` Rejoin: “motion“. *Wait*, I am skipping *Ruffin*. The start of *SCG* is on page 953. *SCG* text: “The Supreme Court... prior mo-” [953] “tion, as the new...” [954] Refining the page break in the middle of “motion“: `

The Supreme Court also properly denied that branch of the defendant‘s motion which was for leave to renew its prior motion, as the new facts proffered would not have changed the prior determination...` Actually, looking at the image: Bottom of page 953: `prior mo-` Top of page 954: `tion, as the new` So the marker `` should go between `mo` and `tion`. Wait, “Garfinkle Ltd.” is at the very end of page 953. Actually, let‘s look at the screenshot for page 1 carefully. Line 30: `prior determination (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]; Garfinkle Ltd.` Then a line break. Then the screenshot for page 2 starts: `Partnership II v 11 Mecox Bay Inn, Inc., 52 AD3d 467 [2008];` Wait, the word “motion” was earlier? Let‘s check page 1 again. “mo- [break] tion” is in the second paragraph of *SCG*. Yes: `prior mo-` (end of page 1). `tion, as the new` (start of page 2). Wait, look at page 1 again. The last line is `prior determination (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]; Garfinkle Ltd.` So `mo-tion` is NOT split across pages 953 and 954. `motion` is on page 953. Wait, looking at the OCR... OCR for page 1 ends with `Garfinkle Ltd.` OCR for page 2 starts with `Partnership II`. Okay, so the break is after `Ltd.` Wait, the word “motion” in the OCR shows `mo- [break] tion`. Let me check page 1 screenshot again. Line 27: `...to renew its prior mo-` Line 28: `tion, as the new...` Ah, both lines 27 and 28 are on page 953. The OCR just shows the line break. Where does 954 start? Page 1 screenshot shows text ending at `Garfinkle Ltd.` Page 2 screenshot starts with `Partnership II...` So the page marker `` goes between `Ltd.` and `Partnership`. Let‘s re-read line 27/28. Line 27: `...prior mo-` Line 28: `tion, as the new...` Since they are on the same page, I rejoin them into `motion`. Final check on the *SCG* text start: It begins on page 953. `The Supreme Court providently...` One more check: Is there any amicus or attorney info? No, just the opinion text. Wait, the judges for the *Ruffin* case are at the end of the *Ruffin* text. The judges for the *SCG* case are at the end of the *SCG* text. Correct. Final Structure: 1. Case Info (`SCG Architects`) 2. Page marker 953 3. Body (Paragraph 1) 4. Body (Paragraph 2 - with page marker 954 mid-paragraph) 5. Body (Paragraph 3) 6. Signature block (Rivera et al.) Wait, the rule: “convert only the MAIN opinion“. If there are multiple, usually I pick the first full one. Case 1: *Ruffin* (partial) - Skip. Case 2: *SCG Architects* (full) - Include. Case 3: *Jacob Shafran* (starts on page 954, but the full text is not provided - it cuts off). So *SCG Architects* is the only complete one. One last check: `918 NYS2d 733`. The citation is in brackets. I‘ll include it in Case Information. Case Name capitalization: “SCG ARCHITECTS et al., Respondents, v SMITH, BUSS & JACOBS, LLP, Appellant.” Short Name: “SCG Architects v. Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP” (Standard Bluebook: first party v second party, no et al). Court Name: The page doesn‘t say “Appellate Division, Second Department” but the judges (Rivera, Dickerson, Eng, Lott) are famously from that court. The NY reports usually have the court name at the top or in the header, which is cropped. However, AD3d is the Appellate Division. Given the judges, I‘m 100% sure it‘s 2nd Dept. But if I should strictly only use what‘s on the page... The instructions say: `court` attribute uses Bluebook abbreviation (e.g., `court=“9th Cir.“`). For NY Appellate Division, “N.Y. App. Div.” is the standard. Citation pinpoints: 74 AD3d 771, 772 -> cite=“74 A.D.3d 771” pinpoint=“772” 72 AD3d 797, 799 -> cite=“72 A.D.3d 797” pinpoint=“799” 49 AD3d 220, 229 -> cite=“49 A.D.3d 220” pinpoint=“229” 52 AD3d 467 -> cite=“52 A.D.3d 467” 51 AD3d 875 -> cite=“51 A.D.3d 875” 50 AD3d 1023, 1024 -> cite=“50 A.D.3d 1023” pinpoint=“1024” NYS2d citation: 918 NYS2d 733 -> cite=“918 N.Y.S.2d 733” Double check the law citations normalization: CPLR 3025 [b] -> cite=“N.Y. C.P.L.R. 3025(b)” CPLR 2221 [e] [2] -> cite=“N.Y. C.P.L.R. 2221(e)(2)” One detail: The text says “defendant‘s” (straight quote). Final review of the first paragraph of SCG Architects: `The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the defendant‘s motion which was for leave to amend its answer to assert the affirmative defense of res judicata, as the proposed amendment was patently devoid of merit (see CPLR 3025 [b]; Rector v City of New York, 74 AD3d 771, 772 [2010]; Summit at Pomona, Ltd. v Village of Pomona, 72 AD3d 797, 799 [2010]; Lucido v Mancuso, 49 AD3d 220, 229 [2008]).` Note: “defendant‘s” is singular possessive. Final review of the second paragraph: `The Supreme Court also properly denied that branch of the defendant‘s motion which was for leave to renew its prior motion, as the new facts proffered would not have changed the prior determination (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]; Garfinkle Ltd. Partnership II v 11 Mecox Bay Inn, Inc., 52 AD3d 467 [2008]; Kletke v GOS Corp., 51 AD3d 875 [2008]; Worthy v Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr., 50 AD3d 1023, 1024 [2008]).` Page Break placement: `Garfinkle Ltd. Partnership II` Checking the line: `Garfinkle Ltd.` (end of p953) `Partnership II` (start of p954). Yes. One thing: The case name in the citation: “Garfinkle Ltd. Partnership II v 11 Mecox Bay Inn, Inc.“. Does the page break go inside the `` tag? Yes. Rule: “When a page break occurs mid-paragraph, place the marker inline“. Citations are part of the paragraph. `The defendant‘s remaining contentions are without merit.` (Paragraph 3) `Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.` (Signature block) Ready to generate. Wait, I should check if “SCG Architects” has a date. Looking at 918 NYS2d 733... the date is March 22, 2011. Should I include it? “Extract metadata here... preserve formatting exactly (dates...)“. If the date isn‘t in the provided text, I shouldn‘t hallucinate it. I will leave it out. Wait, “918 NYS2d 733” is in the text. I‘ll include it in ``. Double check: “Short Name uses Bluebook-style... omit ‘et al.’ and procedural phrases“. Case: “SCG ARCHITECTS et al., Respondents, v SMITH, BUSS & JACOBS, LLP, Appellant.” Short Name: “SCG Architects v. Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP” One last look at OCR/Images: - `CPLR 3025 [b]` - `CPLR 2221 [e] [2]` - `Rector v City of New York, 74 AD3d 771, 772 [2010]` CPLR is usually N.Y. C.P.L.R. I will use `N.Y. C.P.L.R. 3025(b)` for normalization. One minor OCR error in the Shafran case (just for my awareness): `918NYS2d780` should be `918 NYS2d 780`. I‘m skipping Shafran anyway. Let‘s check the marker for the first page. `` goes after ``. The signature block rule: “Skip signature images, preserve typed name and title.” `Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.` This is the typed names and their titles (J.P., JJ). Wait, should “Rivera, J.P... concur.” be in a signature block or just a paragraph? Instructions: “preserve typed name and title.” Usually, a list of concurring judges in this format at the end of an AD3d memo is the “signature” of the court. I‘ll put it in the signature block div. Final check on text: - “providently exercised its discretion” - “patently devoid of merit” - “leave to renew its prior motion” - “new facts proffered” Wait, “prior mo- [break] tion“. I will rejoin it. Image p953: `prior mo-` Line 27. Line 28: `tion, as the new...` Yes, definitely rejoin. Correct citation for *Garfinkle*: `Garfinkle Ltd. Partnership II v 11 Mecox Bay Inn, Inc., 52 AD3d 467 [2008]` The `cite` is `52 A.D.3d 467`. Note the name “Garfinkle Ltd. Partnership II“. Actually, looking at the image: `Garfinkle Ltd.` (line end) `Partnership II` (next page) I will put the marker there. Final check of the rule: “Only include page markers where content follows — do not add a trailing marker at the end“. Page 954 contains the second half of the *SCG* case and the start of the *Shafran* case. Since I‘m only doing *SCG*, the content on 954 for *SCG* is just the top few lines. One thing about the reporter citation in the tags. I will use `A.D.3d` instead of `AD3d` for the cite attribute (normalization). `74 AD3d 771` -> `cite=“74 A.D.3d 771“`. `918 NYS2d 733` -> `cite=“918 N.Y.S.2d 733“`. Wait, the rule: “Use ‘&’ not ‘&‘“. I assume this means use literal `&` in the `case` attribute of the tag, or just standard HTML escaping. Usually, it means don‘t use the HTML entity in the attribute value if the prompt says “not“. But usually, standard HTML requires entity escaping for `&`. I‘ll use `&` or just `&` depending on how strict the “Output raw HTML only” is. I‘ll use standard `&` in attributes. Wait, the rule: “Use ‘&’ not ‘&‘“. This is likely a typo in the prompt‘s instructions (should have been “not &“). I‘ll use `&` in the `case` attribute value. Let‘s check the `cite` attribute for Law: `N.Y. C.P.L.R. 3025(b)` `N.Y. C.P.L.R. 2221(e)(2)` Jurisdiction: `NY`. One more check on `midpage-case-info`: `shortName=“SCG Architects v. Smith, Buss & Jacobs, LLP“` `docket=““` (Omit) `court=“N.Y. App. Div.“` `date=““` (Omit as not on page) `citation=“918 NYS2d 733“` Ready.