Cleary v. Cleary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cleary v. Cleary

41 A.D.2d 972, 344 N.Y.S.2d 302, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4306

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

DecidedMay 31, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 41 A.D.2d 972 (Cleary v. Cleary) 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

Cleary v. Cleary, 41 A.D.2d 972, 344 N.Y.S.2d 302, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4306 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

In a support proceeding pursuant to article 4 of the Family Court Act, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated January 8, 1973 and made after a hearing, which committed appellant to the Orange County Jail for six months, upon a finding that he willfully disobeyed a support order of said court. Order summarily reversed, on the law, without costs, and proceeding remanded to the Family Court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. It appears that the court reporter who stenographically recorded the minutes of the hearing has died and that no one is able to read the stenographic record for the purpose of transcribing it for review on this appeal. Accordingly, the order must be reversed summarily. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Shapiro, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In a support proceeding pursuant to article 4 of the Family Court Act, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated January 8, 1973 and made after a hearing, which committed appellant to the Orange County Jail for six months, upon a finding that he willfully disobeyed a support order of said court. Order summarily reversed, on the law, without costs, and proceeding remanded to the Family Court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. It appears that the court reporter who stenographically recorded the minutes of the hearing has died and that no one is able to read the stenographic record for the purpose of transcribing it for review on this appeal. Accordingly, the order must be reversed summarily. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Shapiro, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.2d 972, 344 N.Y.S.2d 302, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4306, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cleary-v-cleary-nyappdiv-1973.