From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of DuBova v. Lekumovich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 13, 2003
302 A.D.2d 459 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2001-09039

Submitted January 10, 2003.

February 13, 2003.

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, Genrikh Lekumovich appeals from an order of protection of the Family Court, Kings County (Turbow, J.), dated September 25, 2001, which, after a hearing, at which it was found that he had committed a family offense by committing the act of harassment in the second degree, granted an order of protection and directed, inter alia, that he stay away from the petitioner and her home.

Robert E. Nicholson, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.

Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Kings County, for a new hearing and determination in accordance herewith.

Although the order of protection has expired, in light of the enduring consequences which may potentially flow from an adjudication that a party has committed a family offense, the appeal is not academic (see Matter of O'Herron v. O'Herron, 300 A.D.2d 491 [2d Dept, Dec. 16, 2002]; Matter of Mazzola v. Mazzola, 280 A.D.2d 674, 675).

Despite the appellant's request for the assignment of counsel, the ensuing proceedings were conducted without the benefit of counsel for either party, purportedly due to the difficulty of obtaining counsel. The appellant correctly maintains that an indigent appellant in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8 is entitled to the assignment of counsel (see Family Ct Act § 262). Absent a valid waiver of the right to counsel, the determination made following a proceeding at which the indigent appellant's request for counsel was not honored must be reversed (see Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v. Rodriquez, 284 A.D.2d 330, 331; Matter of Meko M., 272 A.D.2d 953; Gaudette v. Gaudette, 263 A.D.2d 620; cf. Matter of Child Welfare Admin. v. Jennifer A., 218 A.D.2d 694).

FLORIO, J.P., FEUERSTEIN, FRIEDMANN and RIVERA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In the Matter of DuBova v. Lekumovich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 13, 2003
302 A.D.2d 459 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

In the Matter of DuBova v. Lekumovich

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF LARISA DuBOVA, respondent, v. GENRIKH LEKUMOVICH…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Feb 13, 2003

Citations

302 A.D.2d 459 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
754 N.Y.S.2d 583

Citing Cases

In the Matter of London v. Blazer

Therefore, the appeals from the dispositional provisions of the superseded orders are dismissed. The…

In the Matter of Ingravera v. Goss

The Family Court erred in ignoring the appellant's unequivocal request for the appointment of counsel,…