From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Polyak v. Toyber

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 15, 2003
2 A.D.3d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-05830.

Decided December 15, 2003.

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the husband appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (DePhillips, J.), dated May 14, 2002, which, upon his consent, directed him, inter alia, to stay away from the petitioner.

Edward E. Caesar, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.

Clearly, Gottlieb, Steen Hamilton, New York, N.Y. (Jeffrey A. Rosenthal, Christopher P. Moore, and Jennifer A. Hershfang of counsel), and Sanctuary for Families Center for Battered Women's Legal Services, New York, N.Y. (Dorchen Leidholdt of counsel), for respondent (one brief filed).

Before: NANCY E. SMITH, HOWARD MILLER, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The appellant is not aggrieved by the order, as it recites that it was entered on his consent ( see CPLR 5511; Matter of Paradowski v. Rowland, 286 A.D.2d 879; Hartnett v. Hartnett, 242 A.D.2d 535; Carr v. Integon Gen. Ins. Corp., 185 A.D.2d 831). Thus, this appeal must be dismissed.

To the extent that the appellant's arguments may be read to assert that such a recitation was erroneous, his remedy is to seek resettlement of the order ( see Matter of Gesvantner v. Dominguez, 273 A.D.2d 383; Hemmings v. St. Marks Hous. Assocs. Phase II, 272 A.D.2d 442; Carr v. Integon Gen. Ins. Corp, supra). To the extent that the appellant's arguments may be read to assert that his consent was not valid and enforceable, his remedy is to seek vacatur of the order ( see e.g. Matter of Andresha G., 251 A.D.2d 1005; Matter of Tina G., 242 A.D.2d 980; Baecher v. Baecher, 95 A.D.2d 841).

RITTER, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Polyak v. Toyber

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 15, 2003
2 A.D.3d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

In the Matter of Polyak v. Toyber

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF ANTONINA POLYAK, respondent, v. MIKHAIL TOYBER, appellant

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

Date published: Dec 15, 2003

Citations

2 A.D.3d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
768 N.Y.S.2d 349

Citing Cases

Strang v. Rathbone

ORDERED that the order dated October 2, 2012, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Where an order,…

Rodney R. v. Govana R.

Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed. To the extent that the petitioner contends on appeal that he did…