Aranjuez v. Saulon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Aranjuez v. Saulon

304 A.D.2d 779, 757 N.Y.S.2d 886

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 28, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 304 A.D.2d 779 (Aranjuez v. Saulon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aranjuez v. Saulon, 304 A.D.2d 779, 757 N.Y.S.2d 886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by a judgment dated April 20, 1999, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gavrin, J.), dated July 26, 2001, as granted her motion to reduce, from $500,000 to $15,000, the amount of the undertaking she was required to post before taking the parties’ children on a proposed overseas vacation, only to the extent of reducing the undertaking to the sum of $200,000.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The issue presented on appeal is academic, because the overseas vacation was cancelled during the pendency of this action and the issue does not qualify as an exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707 [1980]). Santucci, J.P., Feuerstein, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by a judgment dated April 20, 1999, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gavrin, J.), dated July 26, 2001, as granted her motion to reduce, from $500,000 to $15,000, the amount of the undertaking she was required to post before taking the parties’ children on a proposed overseas vacation, only to the extent of reducing the undertaking to the sum of $200,000.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The issue presented on appeal is academic, because the overseas vacation was cancelled during the pendency of this action and the issue does not qualify as an exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707 [1980]). Santucci, J.P., Feuerstein, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

304 A.D.2d 779, 757 N.Y.S.2d 886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aranjuez-v-saulon-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack