Penncara Energy, LLC, 83 AD3d 495, 495 [1st Dept 2011]; Safe-
Card Servs. v American Express Travel Related Servs. Co., 203
AD2d at 65-66; Flintkote Co. v American Mut. Liab. Ins. Co.,
103 AD2d 501, 507 [2d Dept 1984]; 342 W. 30th St. Corp. v
Bradbury, 2011 NY Slip Op 50037[U], *2 [2011].)
There is sufficient identity of parties and claims in this
proceeding and the criminal actions that those actions may col-
laterally estop and thus resolve the claims here if the Appel-
late Term or the Court of Appeals ultimately agrees with the
Criminal Court’s determination of petitioners’ motions to
disqualify the Police Department attorneys. (AIG Fin. Prods.
Corp. v Penncara Energy, LLC, 83 AD3d at 495; SafeCard
Servs. v American Express Travel Related Servs. Co., 203 AD2d
at 66; 342 W. 30th St. Corp. v Bradbury, 2011 NY Slip Op
50037[U], *2 [2011].) Moreover, this proceeding was commenced
after the criminal actions (AIG Fin. Prods. Corp. v Penncara
Energy, LLC, 83 AD3d at 495), in response to them, as signaled
by petitioners’ claims for declaratory and injunctive relief. (Id.
at 496; L-3 Communications Corp. v SafeNet, Inc., 45 AD3d 1,
9 [1st Dept 2007].)
On the other hand, the criminal prosecutions may be resolved
in ways that will not bar the continuation of this proceeding.
(SafeCard Servs. v American Express Travel Related Servs. Co.,
203 AD2d at 65-66; see Mercado v City of New York, 68 AD3d
at 731; Posada v New York State Dept. of Health, 54 AD3d at
1102.) It is more comprehensive than the criminal prosecutions
because, if petitioners are acquitted or their convictions are re-
versed, it will address respondents’ liability for any harms
petitioners may have suffered from their prosecutions, respon-
dents’ obligations for and petitioners’ rights to prosecutions