Garrett v. Garrett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Garrett v. Garrett

221 A.D.2d 340, 633 N.Y.S.2d 514, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11176

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 221 A.D.2d 340 (Garrett v. Garrett) 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

Garrett v. Garrett, 221 A.D.2d 340, 633 N.Y.S.2d 514, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11176 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the husband appeals, by permission, from so much of a temporary order of protection of the Family Court, Rockland County (Stanger, J.), dated February 15, 1994, as directed him to "complete all necessary paper work to permit the petitioner to receive the naturalization papers to which she is entitled”.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the branch of the petition which was to compel the appellant to complete the paperwork to permit the petitioner to receive her naturalization papers is denied.

The apparent intent of the Family Court was to compel the appellant to file an "immediate relative” petition on behalf of the petitioner in order to regularize her immigration status (see, Immigration and Nationality, 8 USC § 1154). Under Federal law, the appellant may, but has no duty to, file such a document (Immigration and Nationality, 8 USC § 1154). His unwillingness to file an immediate relative petition can in no [341]*341way be deemed a family offense so as to warrant the granting of final or interim relief pursuant to Family Court Act article 8 (see, Family Ct Act §§ 812, 828, 842). Accordingly, the order should be reversed insofar as appealed from. Sullivan, J. P., Altman, Hart 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 husband appeals, by permission, from so much of a temporary order of protection of the Family Court, Rockland County (Stanger, J.), dated February 15, 1994, as directed him to "complete all necessary paper work to permit the petitioner to receive the naturalization papers to which she is entitled”.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the branch of the petition which was to compel the appellant to complete the paperwork to permit the petitioner to receive her naturalization papers is denied.

The apparent intent of the Family Court was to compel the appellant to file an "immediate relative” petition on behalf of the petitioner in order to regularize her immigration status (see, Immigration and Nationality, 8 USC § 1154). Under Federal law, the appellant may, but has no duty to, file such a document (Immigration and Nationality, 8 USC § 1154). His unwillingness to file an immediate relative petition can in no [341]*341way be deemed a family offense so as to warrant the granting of final or interim relief pursuant to Family Court Act article 8 (see, Family Ct Act §§ 812, 828, 842). Accordingly, the order should be reversed insofar as appealed from. Sullivan, J. P., Altman, Hart and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

221 A.D.2d 340, 633 N.Y.S.2d 514, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garrett-v-garrett-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack