Connelly v. Velez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Connelly v. Velez

233 A.D.2d 392, 650 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11566

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 233 A.D.2d 392 (Connelly v. Velez) 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

Connelly v. Velez, 233 A.D.2d 392, 650 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11566 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding for visitation pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Decker, J.), dated September 19, 1995, which, after a hearing, granted the father unsupervised visitation with the subject child.

[393]*393Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Upon a review of the hearing testimony, we agree with the Family Court that there is no indication that unsupervised visitation by the natural father poses any risk to the child, or that such visitation is against the best interests of the child (see, Matter of Kilstein v MacDowell, 226 AD2d 727; Matter of Gerald D. v Lucille S., 188 AD2d 650; Koppenhoefer v Koppenhoefer, 159 AD2d 113,116). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Thompson and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding for visitation pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Decker, J.), dated September 19, 1995, which, after a hearing, granted the father unsupervised visitation with the subject child.

[393]*393Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Upon a review of the hearing testimony, we agree with the Family Court that there is no indication that unsupervised visitation by the natural father poses any risk to the child, or that such visitation is against the best interests of the child (see, Matter of Kilstein v MacDowell, 226 AD2d 727; Matter of Gerald D. v Lucille S., 188 AD2d 650; Koppenhoefer v Koppenhoefer, 159 AD2d 113,116). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Thompson and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 A.D.2d 392, 650 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/connelly-v-velez-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack