Gittens v. Chin-On

19 A.D.3d 596, 796 N.Y.S.2d 554, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6923
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 20, 2005
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 19 A.D.3d 596 (Gittens v. Chin-On) 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
Gittens v. Chin-On, 19 A.D.3d 596, 796 N.Y.S.2d 554, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6923 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

In a visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from (1) an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Silber, J.), dated March 9, 2004, which, upon the consent of the father, modified a prior order of visitation dated August 8, 2003, and (2) an order of the same court dated June 22, 2004, which temporarily suspended his visitation with the subject child.

Ordered that the appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The record reflects that on March 9, 2004, the father consented to the modification of the prior order of visitation dated August 8, 2003. As such, the appeal from the order dated March 9, 2004, is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order entered upon the consent of the appealing party, since a party who consents to an order is not aggrieved thereby (see CPLR 5511; Matter of Cooper v Administration for Children Servs., 293 AD2d 605 [2002]; Matter of Hartnett v Hartnett, 242 AD2d 535 [1997]; Goodman v Goodman, 150 AD2d 636 [1989]).

[597]*597Moreover, the appeal from the order dated June 22, 2004, is also dismissed, as no appeal lies as of right from a nonfinal order in a visitation proceeding (see Family Ct Act § 1112), and leave to appeal has not been granted. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Matter of Rinaldi v. Faiella
2019 NY Slip Op 3600 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Elsayed v. Edrees
141 A.D.3d 503 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Strang v. Rathbone
108 A.D.3d 565 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Francis v. Francis
90 A.D.3d 925 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
H.M. v. E.T.
89 A.D.3d 848 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Spelman v. Spelman
81 A.D.3d 837 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
C., THOMAS, ONONDAGA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF, SOCIAL SERVICES v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011
In re Thomas C.
81 A.D.3d 1301 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Richardson v. Gary
73 A.D.3d 931 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
In re Harry Y.
62 A.D.3d 892 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Reilly v. Reilly
49 A.D.3d 883 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Shteierman v. Shteierman
29 A.D.3d 810 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 A.D.3d 596, 796 N.Y.S.2d 554, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6923, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gittens-v-chin-on-nyappdiv-2005.