Fokine v. Prisciantelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fokine v. Prisciantelli

208 A.D.2d 534, 616 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9237

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

DecidedOctober 3, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 208 A.D.2d 534 (Fokine v. Prisciantelli) 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

Fokine v. Prisciantelli, 208 A.D.2d 534, 616 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9237 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the appeal is from so much of an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Amodeo, J.), dated October 29, 1991, as, upon reargument, adhered to a prior determination made by order of the same court, dated August 19, 1991, which dismissed the father’s written objections to an order of support of the same court, entered June 12,1991.

Ordered that the order dated October 29, 1991, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Family Court properly dismissed the appellant’s written objections to the order of support because the appellant failed to file proof of service upon the opposing party with the court at the time of filing the objections (see, Family Ct Act § 439 [e]). Mangano, P. J., Lawrence, Copertino, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the appeal is from so much of an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Amodeo, J.), dated October 29, 1991, as, upon reargument, adhered to a prior determination made by order of the same court, dated August 19, 1991, which dismissed the father’s written objections to an order of support of the same court, entered June 12,1991.

Ordered that the order dated October 29, 1991, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Family Court properly dismissed the appellant’s written objections to the order of support because the appellant failed to file proof of service upon the opposing party with the court at the time of filing the objections (see, Family Ct Act § 439 [e]). Mangano, P. J., Lawrence, Copertino, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 A.D.2d 534, 616 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fokine-v-prisciantelli-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack