From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Cleary v. Morgan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 23, 2003
306 A.D.2d 475 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2000-06010, 2000-06011, 2000-06013

Submitted June 6, 2003.

June 23, 2003.

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the father appeals from (1) an order of the Family Court, Rockland County (Warren, J.), dated June 6, 2000, which, after a hearing, finding that he committed a family offense within the meaning of Family Court Act § 812, granted the petitioner an order of protection from June 6, 2000, until June 6, 2003, (2) an order of the same court, also dated June 6, 2000, which committed him to the Rockland County Jail for a term of five months commencing May 31, 2000, and (3) an order of the same court dated June 13, 2000, which placed him on probation for a period of one year upon the termination of his commitment to the Rockland County Jail.

Lewis Lefcourt, New City, N.Y. (Arleen Lewis of counsel), for appellant.

Michael D. Diederich, Jr., Stony Point, N.Y., for respondent.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, BARRY A. COZIER, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Although the order of protection, order of commitment, and order which placed the appellant on probation have all expired, under the circumstances of this case, "in light of the enduring consequences which may potentially flow from an adjudication that a party has committed a family offense," the appeals are not academic (Matter of O'Herron v. O'Herron, 300 A.D.2d 491, 492; see also Matter of Kennedy v. Tsombanis, 277 A.D.2d 315; cf. Matter of Bickwid v. Deutsch, 87 N.Y.2d 862).

The Family Court's determination that the father committed a family offense within the meaning of Family Court Act § 812 was supported by the weight of the evidence (see Matter of Savine v. Savine-Rivas, 274 A.D.2d 585, 586).

The father's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit.

SANTUCCI, J.P., SCHMIDT, COZIER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Cleary v. Morgan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 23, 2003
306 A.D.2d 475 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

In the Matter of Cleary v. Morgan

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF LORRAINE CLEARY, respondent, v. RICHARD MORGAN, appellant

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

Date published: Jun 23, 2003

Citations

306 A.D.2d 475 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
761 N.Y.S.2d 508

Citing Cases

Richmond v. Perez

Ordered that the order entered April 10, 2006 is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and…

In the Matter of Cutter v. Feldman

The record supports the court's determination that, based on a preponderance of the evidence, the father…