Opinion
2001-08926
Argued October 15, 2002.
November 18, 2002.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of a commercial lease, the defendant Lawrence Peska appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Carey, J.), dated September 10, 2001, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against him in the principal sum of $40,117.89.
Adam M. Peska, Garnerville, N.Y., for appellant.
Schwartz Silverstein, LLP, New City, N.Y. (Mark D. Lefkowitz of counsel), for respondent.
Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, SONDRA MILLER, HOWARD MILLER, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.
The judgment appealed from was rendered after a nonjury trial. The appellant, however, has failed to provide this court with a copy of the transcript of the trial (see 22 NYCRR 670.9[b][1]).
"It is the obligation of the appellant to assemble a proper record on appeal" (Sultan v. Sultan, 295 A.D.2d 498; Matison v. County of Nassau, 290 A.D.2d 494; Singh v. Getty Petroleum Corp., 275 A.D.2d 740) . An appellant's record on appeal "must contain all of the relevant papers before the Supreme Court, including the transcript, if any, of the proceedings" (Whyte v. Destra, 298 A.D.2d 384 [2d Dept, Oct. 7, 2002]; see Desmarat v. Basile, 288 A.D.2d 336; Matison v. County of Nassau, supra; Lowry v. Suffolk Co. Water Auth., 287 A.D.2d 551). An appellant's failure to provide a necessary transcript or pertinent exhibits inhibits the court's ability to render an informed decision on the merits of the appeal (Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v. Vargas, 288 A.D.2d 309; Riverso v. Allstate Ins. Co., 282 A.D.2d 663; Svoboda v. Svoboda, 275 A.D.2d 742). Appeals that are not based upon complete and proper records must be dismissed (see Matison v. County of Nassau, supra; Desmarat v. Basile, supra; Lowry v. Suffolk Co. Water Auth., supra; Riverso v. Allstate Ins. Co., supra; Matter of Zaikowski v. Monzon, 277 A.D.2d 459; Singh v. Getty Petroleum Corp., supra; Svoboda v. Svoboda, supra).
Without a trial transcript, we are unable to determine whether the Supreme Court awarded the plaintiff damages in excess of those recoverable from the breach in controversy, as opposed to the period of an earlier breach that was the subject of prior litigation. Additionally, we cannot determine whether the Supreme Court properly pierced the corporate veil of any of the corporate defendants to impose liability against the individual defendant. Thus, this appeal must be dismissed.
RITTER, J.P., FLORIO, S. MILLER and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.