From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hilary C. v. Michael K.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Mar 10, 2022
203 A.D.3d 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

Opinion

15489 Dkt. Nos. V-05896-18/18E, V-05896-18/19F, V-05896-18/19G, O-00820-21 Case Nos. 2021-01579, 2021-02377

03-10-2022

In the Matter of HILARY C., Petitioner–Respondent, v. MICHAEL K., Respondent–Appellant.

Philip Katz, New York, for appellant. Carol Kahn, New York, for respondent.


Philip Katz, New York, for appellant.

Carol Kahn, New York, for respondent.

Manzanet–Daniels, J.P., Mazzarelli, Gonza´lez, Shulman, Rodriguez, JJ.

Order, Family Court, New York County (Karen I. Lupuloff, J.), entered on or about May 5, 2021, which, upon respondent father's admission that he committed civil contempt, ordered him incarcerated for 30 days, unanimously modified, on the law, the disposition vacated and replaced by time served, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Although the father is in Japan, we decline to dismiss the appeal pursuant to the fugitive disentitlement doctrine. There is no "nexus" connecting the father's fugitive status and these proceedings (see Wechsler v. Wechsler, 45 A.D.3d 470, 472, 847 N.Y.S.2d 26 [1st Dept. 2007] ). The father has continued to appear virtually in court, communicate with his counsel, and consent to relief sought by the mother. He has complied with the terms of his probation and submitted an affidavit stating that he will return to New York to comply with any court order. Under these circumstances, we find that the father has not "flout[ed] the judicial process," frustrated the operation of the courts, or prejudiced the mother's rights by leaving the jurisdiction to warrant dismissal of the appeal ( id. ).

The father admitted that he knowingly and willfully violated a court order directing him not to communicate with the attorneys of record in a disparaging way and to refrain from using profanity. Accordingly, the Family Court correctly found the father in civil contempt (see El–Dehdan v. El–Dehdan, 26 N.Y.3d 19, 29, 19 N.Y.S.3d 475, 41 N.E.3d 340 [2015] ).

We find under the circumstances that the imposition of 30 days in prison was inappropriate.

We have considered the parties' remaining contentions and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Hilary C. v. Michael K.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Mar 10, 2022
203 A.D.3d 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)
Case details for

Hilary C. v. Michael K.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of HILARY C., Petitioner–Respondent, v. MICHAEL K.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Mar 10, 2022

Citations

203 A.D.3d 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)
203 A.D.3d 486