Grossman v. Meller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Grossman v. Meller

251 A.D.2d 214, 675 N.Y.S.2d 862, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7451

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

DecidedJune 23, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 251 A.D.2d 214 (Grossman v. Meller) 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

Grossman v. Meller, 251 A.D.2d 214, 675 N.Y.S.2d 862, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7451 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Fern Fisher-Brandveen, J.), entered on or about March 10, 1997, which denied defendant’s motion to confirm a Special Referee’s report recommending that custody of the parties’ child be changed from plaintiff to defendant and that plaintiff be held in contempt, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Special Referee’s recommendation that there be a change of custody was properly rejected for lack of record evidence of the child’s best interests (see, Allen v Farrow, 215 AD2d 137, 138, 140; Matter of Krebsbach v Gallagher, 181 AD2d 363, 364-365, lv denied 81 NY2d 701), and his recommendation that plaintiff be held in contempt for frustrating visitation was properly rejected in the absence of the complete hearing minutes (cf., Di Francesco v Di Francesco, 23 AD2d 740). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Fern Fisher-Brandveen, J.), entered on or about March 10, 1997, which denied defendant’s motion to confirm a Special Referee’s report recommending that custody of the parties’ child be changed from plaintiff to defendant and that plaintiff be held in contempt, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Special Referee’s recommendation that there be a change of custody was properly rejected for lack of record evidence of the child’s best interests (see, Allen v Farrow, 215 AD2d 137, 138, 140; Matter of Krebsbach v Gallagher, 181 AD2d 363, 364-365, lv denied 81 NY2d 701), and his recommendation that plaintiff be held in contempt for frustrating visitation was properly rejected in the absence of the complete hearing minutes (cf., Di Francesco v Di Francesco, 23 AD2d 740). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 214, 675 N.Y.S.2d 862, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7451, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grossman-v-meller-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack