Opinion
525116
01-03-2019
In the Matter of NATASHA S., Appellant, v. RONALD R., Respondent.
Teresa C. Mulliken, Harpersfield, for appellant. Christine E. Nicolella, Delanson, attorney for the child.
Teresa C. Mulliken, Harpersfield, for appellant.
Christine E. Nicolella, Delanson, attorney for the child.
Before: Garry, P.J., Mulvey, Aarons, Rumsey and Pritzker, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Garry, P.J.
Petitioner (hereinafter the mother) and respondent (hereinafter the father) are the unwed parents of a child (born in 2012). Pursuant to a 2016 order, as modified in 2017, the parents shared joint legal custody, with primary physical custody to the father and parenting time to the mother. In February 2017, the mother filed a modification petition, seeking primary physical custody based upon her recent relocation closer to the child and the father's planned relocation nearly an hour away from the mother. Following fact-finding and Lincoln hearings, Family Court dismissed the mother's petition. The mother appeals.The attorney for the child advises that, during the pendency of this appeal, the mother and the father filed additional petitions resulting in the issuance of a further order relative to physical custody of the child. This subsequent order expressly superseded the order on appeal. Accordingly, the instant appeal has been rendered moot and, as the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply, must be dismissed (see Matter of Charles EE. v. Hanna FF. , 141 A.D.3d 754, 755, 34 N.Y.S.3d 739 [2016] ; Matter of Attorney for the Child v. Cole , 140 A.D.3d 1335, 1336, 34 N.Y.S.3d 220 [2016] ; Matter of Dalmida v. Livermore , 134 A.D.3d 1306, 1306–1307, 21 N.Y.S.3d 487 [2015] ).
Mulvey, Aarons, Rumsey and Pritzker, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.