DeNobile v. Tenaglia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeNobile v. Tenaglia

299 A.D.2d 409, 749 N.Y.S.2d 442

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

DecidedNovember 12, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 299 A.D.2d 409 (DeNobile v. Tenaglia) 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

DeNobile v. Tenaglia, 299 A.D.2d 409, 749 N.Y.S.2d 442 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Hudson, J.), entered December 5, 2001, which, after a hearing, granted the petition for an order of protection.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

There is no basis to disturb the Family Court’s resolution of disputed issues of fact and credibility made after a hearing on the question of whether the husband committed a family offense (see Matter of Campbell v Desir, 251 AD2d 402; Matter of Cutrone v Cutrone, 225 AD2d 767).

The appellant’s remaining contentions either are not properly before this Court or without merit. Feuerstein, J.P., McGinity, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Hudson, J.), entered December 5, 2001, which, after a hearing, granted the petition for an order of protection.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

There is no basis to disturb the Family Court’s resolution of disputed issues of fact and credibility made after a hearing on the question of whether the husband committed a family offense (see Matter of Campbell v Desir, 251 AD2d 402; Matter of Cutrone v Cutrone, 225 AD2d 767).

The appellant’s remaining contentions either are not properly before this Court or without merit. Feuerstein, J.P., McGinity, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

299 A.D.2d 409, 749 N.Y.S.2d 442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/denobile-v-tenaglia-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack