From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bahr v. Bahr

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 13, 1984
105 A.D.2d 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Opinion

November 13, 1984

Appeal from the Family Court, Putnam County (Hickman, J.).


Appeal dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal must be dismissed because review of the record indicates that the order from which appellant has appealed was entered upon his consent. No appeal lies from an order entered on consent (CPLR 5511; Baecher v Baecher, 95 A.D.2d 841, 842; Matter of Anderson v Jeandheur, 21 A.D.2d 980; City Bank Farmers Trust Co. v Macfadden, 13 A.D.2d 395, 397, aff'd. 12 N.Y.2d 1035, cert den. 375 U.S. 823). In any event, the Family Court, Putnam County, possessed jurisdiction to entertain a petition for support, initiated pursuant to the Uniform Support of Dependents Law, irrespective of the existence of the order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated June 4, 1981, which had awarded child support (see Matter of Brizzi v Brizzi, 92 A.D.2d 919). Appellant's other claims are similarly without merit and do not warrant discussion. Mollen, P.J., Titone, Bracken and Rubin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bahr v. Bahr

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 13, 1984
105 A.D.2d 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)
Case details for

Bahr v. Bahr

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM R. BAHR, Appellant, v. CYNTHIA A. BAHR, Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 13, 1984

Citations

105 A.D.2d 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Citing Cases

Nutkiewicz v. Nutkiewicz

Initially, we note that this appeal properly lies. No appeal lies from a judgment entered on consent or…

Matter of Michael

Respondent now appeals contending that he is not a person legally responsible for Michael's care within the…