Baksh v. Baksh

49 A.D.3d 728, 852 N.Y.2d 851

This text of 49 A.D.3d 728 (Baksh v. Baksh) 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
Baksh v. Baksh, 49 A.D.3d 728, 852 N.Y.2d 851 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

The allegations set forth in the petition failed to state a cause of action constituting a family offense pursuant to Family Court Act § 812 (1) (see Matter of Eck v Eck, 44 AD3d 1168, 1169 [2007]; Matter of Santiago v Friedman, 35 AD3d 482 [2006]; Matter of Thomas v Thomas, 32 AD3d 521 [2006]; Matter of Ford v Pitts, 30 AD3d 419, 420 [2006]; Swersky v Swersky, 299 AD2d 540 [2002]).

[729]*729The appellant’s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see Matter of Anthony R., 43 AD3d 939 [2007]; Matter of Rahmel S., 4 AD3d 365, 366 [2004]). Spolzino, J.P., Santucci, Angiolillo and Balkin', JJ., concur.

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

Related

In re Rahmel S.
4 A.D.3d 365 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Ford v. Pitts
30 A.D.3d 419 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Thomas v. Thomas
32 A.D.3d 521 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Santiago v. Friedman
35 A.D.3d 482 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
In re Anthony R.
43 A.D.3d 939 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Eck v. Eck
44 A.D.3d 1168 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Swersky v. Swersky
299 A.D.2d 540 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 A.D.3d 728, 852 N.Y.2d 851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baksh-v-baksh-nyappdiv-2008.