Geritano v. Geritano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Geritano v. Geritano

212 A.D.2d 788, 624 N.Y.S.2d 858, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2143

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 212 A.D.2d 788 (Geritano v. Geritano) 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

Geritano v. Geritano, 212 A.D.2d 788, 624 N.Y.S.2d 858, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2143 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Segal, J.), dated February 1, 1993, which adjudged the appellant to be in contempt for willfully violating an order of protection of the same court, dated December 15, 1992, and directed his incarceration for a period of 90 days.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The appellant has already served the sentence of incarceration that was imposed pursuant to Family Court Act § 846-a. Therefore, the appellant’s challenge to the order of the Family Court dated February 1, 1993, is academic (see, Matter of Zapata v Middleton, 197 AD2d 526, 527; see also, Trentacoste v Trentacoste, 211 AD2d 724). Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Joy 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 the Family Court, Kings County (Segal, J.), dated February 1, 1993, which adjudged the appellant to be in contempt for willfully violating an order of protection of the same court, dated December 15, 1992, and directed his incarceration for a period of 90 days.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The appellant has already served the sentence of incarceration that was imposed pursuant to Family Court Act § 846-a. Therefore, the appellant’s challenge to the order of the Family Court dated February 1, 1993, is academic (see, Matter of Zapata v Middleton, 197 AD2d 526, 527; see also, Trentacoste v Trentacoste, 211 AD2d 724). Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 A.D.2d 788, 624 N.Y.S.2d 858, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2143, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/geritano-v-geritano-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack