Dienes v. Dienes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dienes v. Dienes

240 A.D.2d 576, 659 N.Y.S.2d 788, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6594

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

DecidedJune 16, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 240 A.D.2d 576 (Dienes v. Dienes) 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

Dienes v. Dienes, 240 A.D.2d 576, 659 N.Y.S.2d 788, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6594 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the appeal is from an order of protection of the Family Court, Richmond County (Clark J.), dated July 7, 1995, which, after a hearing, directed the appellant, inter alia, not to assault, menace, harass, recklessly endanger, or engage in disorderly conduct toward the petitioner and to stay away from her and her residence for a period of one year.

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

The record supports the Family Court’s conclusion that the appellant committed the family offense of harassment, thereby warranting the issuance of an order of protection against him (see, Matter of Platsky v Platsky, 237 AD2d 610; Matter of Cesaire v Cesaire, 228 AD2d 592; Matter of Tibichrani v Debs, 230 AD2d 746; Matter of Cutrone v Cutrone, 225 AD2d 767; Matter of Pesce v Pesce, 223 AD2d 647). O’Brien, J. P., Thompson, Pizzuto and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the appeal is from an order of protection of the Family Court, Richmond County (Clark J.), dated July 7, 1995, which, after a hearing, directed the appellant, inter alia, not to assault, menace, harass, recklessly endanger, or engage in disorderly conduct toward the petitioner and to stay away from her and her residence for a period of one year.

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

The record supports the Family Court’s conclusion that the appellant committed the family offense of harassment, thereby warranting the issuance of an order of protection against him (see, Matter of Platsky v Platsky, 237 AD2d 610; Matter of Cesaire v Cesaire, 228 AD2d 592; Matter of Tibichrani v Debs, 230 AD2d 746; Matter of Cutrone v Cutrone, 225 AD2d 767; Matter of Pesce v Pesce, 223 AD2d 647). O’Brien, J. P., Thompson, Pizzuto and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D.2d 576, 659 N.Y.S.2d 788, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dienes-v-dienes-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack