Opinion
12219 Dkt. No. V29041/17 Case No. 2019-2714
10-29-2020
In re HYLAND P., Petitioner-Appellant, v. ERICKA B., et al., Respondents-Respondents.
Leslie S. Lowenstein, Woodmere, for appellant.
Leslie S. Lowenstein, Woodmere, for appellant.
Renwick, J.P., Gesmer, Kern, Singh, JJ.
Appeal from order, Family Court, New York County (Clark V. Richardson, J.), entered on or about December 14, 2018, which, after a hearing, awarded the mother unsupervised visitation with the subject child subject to certain restrictions, unanimously dismissed, without costs.
Application by the father's counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 [1967] ; People v. Saunders, 52 A.D.2d 833, 384 N.Y.S.2d 161 [1st Dept. 1976] ). A review of the record demonstrates that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. The father is not aggrieved by the order since he consented to visitation subject to the restrictions he requested, which the court granted (see CPLR 5511 ; Matter of Geddes v. Montpetit, 15 A.D.3d 797, 789 N.Y.S.2d 767 [3d Dept 2005], lv dismissed 4 N.Y.3d 869, 797 N.Y.S.2d 814, 830 N.E.2d 1142 [2005] ). In any event, the order has now been superseded by a subsequent order, thus rendering the appeal moot (see e.g. Matter of Rolando A.G. v. Marisol R.M., 172 A.D.3d 631, 631, 99 N.Y.S.3d 612 [1st Dept. 2019] ).