Butner v. Butner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Butner v. Butner

119 A.D.2d 719, 501 N.Y.S.2d 602, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55645

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

DecidedApril 21, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 119 A.D.2d 719 (Butner v. Butner) 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

Butner v. Butner, 119 A.D.2d 719, 501 N.Y.S.2d 602, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55645 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a matrimonial action, the defendant husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Beerman, J.), dated April 9, 1984, as awarded sole custody of the parties’ child to the plaintiff wife..

Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Although Special Term’s decision awarding custody of the infant issue to the plaintiff failed to fully state the factual basis for the determination (cf. CPLR 4213 [b]), our independent examination of the record reveals ample evidence to support the judgment (see, Matter of Jose L. I. v Mildred I., 46 [720]*720NY2d 1024). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Gibbons and Bracken, JJ., concur.

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

— In a matrimonial action, the defendant husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Beerman, J.), dated April 9, 1984, as awarded sole custody of the parties’ child to the plaintiff wife..

Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Although Special Term’s decision awarding custody of the infant issue to the plaintiff failed to fully state the factual basis for the determination (cf. CPLR 4213 [b]), our independent examination of the record reveals ample evidence to support the judgment (see, Matter of Jose L. I. v Mildred I., 46 [720]*720NY2d 1024). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Gibbons and Bracken, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 A.D.2d 719, 501 N.Y.S.2d 602, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55645, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/butner-v-butner-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack