Bickwid v. Deutsch

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bickwid v. Deutsch

210 A.D.2d 400, 620 N.Y.S.2d 421, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12835

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

DecidedDecember 19, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 210 A.D.2d 400 (Bickwid v. Deutsch) 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

Bickwid v. Deutsch, 210 A.D.2d 400, 620 N.Y.S.2d 421, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12835 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a support proceed[401]*401ing pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J.), entered May 28, 1993, which directed the imprisonment of the appellant for 48 days.

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

The Family Court determined that the appellant willfully violated a 1991 order of child support and directed his incarceration for a period of 48 days under Family Court Act § 454 (3) (a). Since the appellant has already served his sentence of incarceration, under the circumstances of this case, his challenges to the order of the Family Court are academic (see, Matter of Zapata v Middleton, 197 AD2d 526; Matter of Madison County Support Collection Unit [Bordell] v Drennan, 156 AD2d 883; Ward v Ward, 71 AD2d 854; cf., Matter of Williams v Cornelius, 76 NY2d 542). Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

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

—In a support proceed[401]*401ing pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J.), entered May 28, 1993, which directed the imprisonment of the appellant for 48 days.

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

The Family Court determined that the appellant willfully violated a 1991 order of child support and directed his incarceration for a period of 48 days under Family Court Act § 454 (3) (a). Since the appellant has already served his sentence of incarceration, under the circumstances of this case, his challenges to the order of the Family Court are academic (see, Matter of Zapata v Middleton, 197 AD2d 526; Matter of Madison County Support Collection Unit [Bordell] v Drennan, 156 AD2d 883; Ward v Ward, 71 AD2d 854; cf., Matter of Williams v Cornelius, 76 NY2d 542). Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 A.D.2d 400, 620 N.Y.S.2d 421, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12835, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bickwid-v-deutsch-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack