From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of King v. Flowers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 27, 2004
13 A.D.3d 629 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2004-01743.

December 27, 2004.

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 February 5, 2004, which, after a hearing, dismissed the petition for an order of protection.

Before: Santucci, J.P., H. Miller, Spolzino and Skelos, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court properly dismissed the petition upon finding that the petitioner failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent committed acts constituting a cognizable family offense ( see Family Ct Act § 832). The determination whether the respondent committed such acts was a disputed factual issue for the Family Court to resolve. As the trier of fact, its determination regarding the credibility of the witnesses is entitled to great weight ( see Matter of Bongiorno v. Bongiorno, 1 AD3d 511), and we find no basis to disturb its determination.


Summaries of

In the Matter of King v. Flowers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 27, 2004
13 A.D.3d 629 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

In the Matter of King v. Flowers

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of EVA M. KING, Appellant, v. RAMEL FLOWERS, Respondent

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

Date published: Dec 27, 2004

Citations

13 A.D.3d 629 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
786 N.Y.S.2d 345

Citing Cases

Robinson v. Bennett

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The determination of whether a family…

Lannaman v. Minus

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