Chang v. Conway

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chang v. Conway

302 A.D.2d 459, 754 N.Y.S.2d 582

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

DecidedFebruary 10, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 302 A.D.2d 459 (Chang v. Conway) 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

Chang v. Conway, 302 A.D.2d 459, 754 N.Y.S.2d 582 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County (Garvey, J.), dated February 11, 2002, which directed him to submit to a mental health evaluation by a board certified psychiatrist.

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

An appeal may be taken as of right from any order of disposition (see Family Ct Act § 1112 [a]). The order directing the father to submit to a mental health examination is not an order of disposition (see Dillard v Dillard, 48 AD2d 666) and, consequently, it is not appealable as of right. Since leave to appeal has not been granted, the appeal must be dismissed. Ritter, J.P., Altman, S. Miller and Townes, JJ., concur.

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

In a child visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County (Garvey, J.), dated February 11, 2002, which directed him to submit to a mental health evaluation by a board certified psychiatrist.

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

An appeal may be taken as of right from any order of disposition (see Family Ct Act § 1112 [a]). The order directing the father to submit to a mental health examination is not an order of disposition (see Dillard v Dillard, 48 AD2d 666) and, consequently, it is not appealable as of right. Since leave to appeal has not been granted, the appeal must be dismissed. Ritter, J.P., Altman, S. Miller and Townes, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

302 A.D.2d 459, 754 N.Y.S.2d 582, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chang-v-conway-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack