From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Perez v. Richmond

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Mar 6, 2013
104 A.D.3d 692 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-03-6

In the Matter of Robert A. PEREZ, appellant, v. Kolien J. RICHMOND, respondent.

Bruce A. Petito, Poughkeepsie, N.Y., for appellant. Legal Services of the Hudson Valley, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Kyle A. Steller of counsel), for respondent.


Bruce A. Petito, Poughkeepsie, N.Y., for appellant. Legal Services of the Hudson Valley, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Kyle A. Steller of counsel), for respondent.

In related proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from two orders of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Posner, J.), dated September 16, 2011, and January 26, 2012, respectively, which, without hearings, dismissed his petitions dated August 12, 2011, and January 13, 2012, respectively, to hold the mother in contempt for violating prior orders of the same court.

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

The father's contention that the Family Court erred in failing to appoint counsel to represent him in these proceedings is without merit. The father does not fall within any of the enumerated classes of persons entitled to the assignment of counsel under the provisions of Family Court Act § 262(a), and, under the circumstances of this case, he was not entitled to assigned counsel under the United States Constitution or the New York Constitution ( seeFamily Ct. Act § 262[b]; Matter of Reiss v. Giraldo, 77 A.D.3d 759, 760, 908 N.Y.S.2d 600). In addition, he failed to fully and timely make the disclosure necessaryto support his claim of indigency ( see Matter of Nilda S. v. Dawn K., 302 A.D.2d 237, 237–238, 754 N.Y.S.2d 281;see also Matter of Anderson v. Harris, 73 A.D.3d 456, 900 N.Y.S.2d 269;Bongiovanni v. Bongiovanni, 295 A.D.2d 296, 297, 742 N.Y.S.2d 902).

The Family Court properly denied, without a hearing, the father's petitions to hold the mother in contempt for her alleged violations of certain provisions of the court's prior orders. The father failed to allege that the mother significantly defeated, impaired, impeded, or prejudiced his rights ( seeJudiciary Law § 753[A]; Matter of Miller v. Miller, 90 A.D.3d 1185, 1186, 933 N.Y.S.2d 924;Matter of Giousos v. Giousos, 73 A.D.3d 775, 776, 899 N.Y.S.2d 647;Matter of Terry v. Oliver, 63 A.D.3d 1079, 1080, 883 N.Y.S.2d 232;Matter of Gonzalez v. Hunter, 50 A.D.3d 1262, 1264, 857 N.Y.S.2d 246). Moreover, a hearing is not required, even where a factual dispute exists, where, as here, the allegations set forth in the petitions, even if accepted as true, are insufficient to support a finding of contempt ( see Matter of Fewell v. Koons, 87 A.D.3d 1405, 1406, 930 N.Y.S.2d 518).

The father's remaining contentions are without merit.

SKELOS, J.P., BALKIN, DICKERSON and HINDS–RADIX, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Perez v. Richmond

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Mar 6, 2013
104 A.D.3d 692 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

Perez v. Richmond

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Robert A. PEREZ, appellant, v. Kolien J. RICHMOND…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Mar 6, 2013

Citations

104 A.D.3d 692 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
959 N.Y.S.2d 925
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 1410

Citing Cases

Tonya YY. v. James ZZ.

In order to prevail on a violation petition, the proponent must establish, as relevant here, "that the…

Moiseeva v. Sichkin

When a party who is entitled to be represented by counsel indicates an inability to retain private counsel,…