From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Halime v. Cokyuksel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 11, 2006
31 A.D.3d 554 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

2005-06104.

July 11, 2006.

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (DePhillips, J.), dated May 19, 2005, which, after a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Before: Schmidt, J.P., Santucci, Luciano and Covello, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

As the trier of fact, the Family Court's determination as to the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight ( see Matter of Onuoha v Onuoha, 28 AD3d 563; Matter of Charles v Charles, 21 AD3d 487; Matter of King v Flowers, 13 AD3d 629). Here, the Family Court's determination hinged on issues of credibility, and we find no basis to disturb it.


Summaries of

Halime v. Cokyuksel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 11, 2006
31 A.D.3d 554 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Halime v. Cokyuksel

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of HALIME KURKCU, Appellant, v. AYSE COKYUKSEL, Respondent

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

Date published: Jul 11, 2006

Citations

31 A.D.3d 554 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 5632
817 N.Y.S.2d 530

Citing Cases

Khan v. Khan

“The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family…

Harris v. Harris

The Family Court's determination that the petitioner failed to establish that the respondent committed a…