From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Raymond v. Raymond

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jan 13, 2016
135 A.D.3d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Opinion

01-13-2016

In the Matter of Alena RAYMOND, respondent, v. Kednel RAYMOND, appellant.

David Laniado, Cedarhurst, N.Y., for appellant. Carol Kahn, New York, N.Y., for respondent.


David Laniado, Cedarhurst, N.Y., for appellant.

Carol Kahn, New York, N.Y., for respondent.

Appeal from an order of protection of the Family Court, Kings County (Maria Arias, J.), dated December 9, 2014. The order of protection, after a hearing, inter alia, directed Kednel Raymond to stay away from the petitioner until and including December 8, 2019.

ORDERED that the order of protection is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The order of protection, which directed the appellant, inter alia, to stay away from the petitioner, was reasonably necessary to enable the petitioner to have meaningful protection (see Matter of Silva v. Silva, 125 A.D.3d 869, 870, 1 N.Y.S.3d 848 ; Matter of Miloslau v. Miloslau, 112 A.D.3d 632, 633, 975 N.Y.S.2d 894 ). Moreover, there was sufficient evidence to support the finding of the existence of aggravating circumstances (see Family Ct. Act § 827[a][vii] ; Matter of Malik v. Syed, 133 A.D.3d 761, 20 N.Y.S.3d 389 ; Matter of Rankoth v. Sloan, 44 A.D.3d 863, 864, 844 N.Y.S.2d 357 ; Matter of Charles v. Charles, 21 A.D.3d 487, 799 N.Y.S.2d 822 ). The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.

Accordingly, the Family Court properly determined that the order of protection should remain in effect for a five-year period (see Family Ct. Act § 842 ).

RIVERA, J.P., DILLON, ROMAN and DUFFY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Raymond v. Raymond

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jan 13, 2016
135 A.D.3d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
Case details for

Raymond v. Raymond

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Alena RAYMOND, respondent, v. Kednel RAYMOND, appellant.

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

Date published: Jan 13, 2016

Citations

135 A.D.3d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
22 N.Y.S.3d 887

Citing Cases

McGorman v. McGorman

The father's contentions that the Family Court violated Family Court Act §§ 261 and 262, regarding assignment…