Dunbar v. Hunter

131 Misc. 2d 706, 501 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1986 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2536
New York City Family Court·Decided April 1, 1986·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Anthony F. Bonadio, J.

The respondent, by his attorney, has filed an objection to [707]*707the hearing examiner’s denial of his motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action (CPLR 3211 [a] [7]).

Family Court Act § 439 (e) provides in part that the "determination of a hearing examiner shall include findings of fact and a final order * * * The parties may submit to a judge within thirty days after entry of the order specific written objections to such order * * * The final order of a hearing examiner, after objections have been reviewed by a judge, may be appealed pursuant to article eleven of this act” (emphasis added). We hold that no objection as of right lies from an interlocutory order

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

Dunbar v. Hunter, 131 Misc. 2d 706, 501 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1986 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2536 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1986).

131 Misc. 2d 706 (Dunbar v. Hunter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Heinlein v. Heinlein
165 Misc. 2d 357 (NYC Family Court, 1995)
McGrath v. McGrath
166 Misc. 2d 512 (NYC Family Court, 1995)
Burry v. Raisbeck
159 Misc. 2d 488 (NYC Family Court, 1993)
Bonnie Lee A. v. Robert A.
149 Misc. 2d 368 (NYC Family Court, 1991)