Opinion
2014-10-1
In the Matter of Jeffrey MARTIN, petitioner-respondent, v. Heather MARTIN, respondent, Danny Wayne Karnes, Jr., appellant.
Del Atwell, East Hampton, N.Y., for appellant. Randy I. Siper, Montgomery, N.Y., for petitioner-respondent.
Del Atwell, East Hampton, N.Y., for appellant. Randy I. Siper, Montgomery, N.Y., for petitioner-respondent.
Dawn M. Shammas, Harrison, N.Y., attorney for the child.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, JEFFREY A. COHEN, and COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.
In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Woods, J.), entered June 24, 2013, which, upon his failure to appear at a hearing, and upon the denial of his attorney's application for an adjournment, following an inquest, granted the maternal grandfather's petition for custody of the subject child.
ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed except insofar as it brings up for review the denial of the father's application for an adjournment ( seeCPLR 5511); and it is further,
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
Since the order appealed from was made upon the appellant's failure to appear, review is limited to matters which were the subject of contest below, namely, the denial of the adjournment request of the appellant's attorney ( see Matter of Sacks v. Abraham, 114 A.D.3d 799, 800, 980 N.Y.S.2d 525; Matter of Kalantarov v. Kalantarova, 109 A.D.3d 471, 969 N.Y.S.2d 920; Matter of Naomi KK. v. Natasha LL., 80 A.D.3d 834, 914 N.Y.S.2d 408). Under the facts of this case, the Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the application made by the appellant's attorney for an adjournment ( see Matter of Sacks v. Abraham, 114 A.D.3d 799, 980 N.Y.S.2d 525; Matter of Kalantarov v. Kalantarova, 109 A.D.3d at 471, 969 N.Y.S.2d 920).