Opinion
10840
01-23-2020
In re ERIC R., Petitioner–Respondent, v. HENRY R., Respondent–Appellant.
Ethan Steward, New York, for appellant. Diaz & Moskowitz, PLLC, New York (Hani M. Moskowitz of counsel), for respondent.
Ethan Steward, New York, for appellant.
Diaz & Moskowitz, PLLC, New York (Hani M. Moskowitz of counsel), for respondent.
Renwick, J.P., Manzanet–Daniels, Kern, Oing, Gonza´lez, JJ.
Order, Family Court, New York County (Christopher W. Coffey, Referee), entered on or about October 19, 2016, which denied respondent grandfather's motion to vacate a prior order, same court and Referee, entered on or about May 26, 2016, which, upon respondent's default, found that he committed the family offenses of harassment in the second degree and attempted assault in the third degree, and granted a final order of protection against him on behalf of petitioner for a period of one year, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Although the order of protection has expired, the appeal is not moot given the "enduring consequences" of an order of protection ( Matter of Veronica P. v. Radcliff A., 24 N.Y.3d 668, 671, 3 N.Y.S.3d 288, 26 N.E.3d 1143 [2015] ). On the merits, the court providently exercised its discretion in denying respondent's motion to vacate his default. Respondent failed to set forth a meritorious defense, as he did not deny the allegations in the petition (see e.g. Matter of Evan Matthew A. [Jocelyn Yvette A.], 91 A.D.3d 538, 938 N.Y.S.2d 6 [1st Dept. 2012] ).