Gregoire v. Gregoire

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gregoire v. Gregoire

278 A.D.2d 925, 718 N.Y.S.2d 676

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

DecidedDecember 27, 2000

DocketAppeal No. 1

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 278 A.D.2d 925 (Gregoire v. Gregoire) 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

Gregoire v. Gregoire, 278 A.D.2d 925, 718 N.Y.S.2d 676 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Respondent waived the protections of Judiciary Law § 756 by contesting the contempt applications on the merits without raising his present objections to the manner in which the proceedings were commenced (see, Matter of Rappaport, 58 NY2d 725, 726; Matter of Glenn v Glenn, 262 AD2d 885, 886, lv dismissed in part and denied in part 94 NY2d 782). The record supports the Hearing Examiner’s findings of fact (see, Matter of Mass DOR/CSE v Hay strand, 256 AD2d 1235), and thus Family Court properly confirmed them. We conclude that respondent’s objections to the findings of fact are without merit and thus that the court properly rejected them. (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Battle, J. — Contempt.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Hayes and Scudder, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Respondent waived the protections of Judiciary Law § 756 by contesting the contempt applications on the merits without raising his present objections to the manner in which the proceedings were commenced (see, Matter of Rappaport, 58 NY2d 725, 726; Matter of Glenn v Glenn, 262 AD2d 885, 886, lv dismissed in part and denied in part 94 NY2d 782). The record supports the Hearing Examiner’s findings of fact (see, Matter of Mass DOR/CSE v Hay strand, 256 AD2d 1235), and thus Family Court properly confirmed them. We conclude that respondent’s objections to the findings of fact are without merit and thus that the court properly rejected them. (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Battle, J. — Contempt.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Hayes and Scudder, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 A.D.2d 925, 718 N.Y.S.2d 676, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gregoire-v-gregoire-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack