Hess v. Flint

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hess v. Flint

5 A.D.3d 1079, 773 N.Y.S.2d 701, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3089

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

DecidedMarch 19, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 5 A.D.3d 1079 (Hess v. Flint) 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

Hess v. Flint, 5 A.D.3d 1079, 773 N.Y.S.2d 701, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3089 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Wyoming County (Michael F. Griffith, J.), entered October 9, 2002. The order held respondent in contempt of a prior order and modified a prior visitation order.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: The order appealed from is based upon a stipulation entered into by the parties and placed on the record in open court, “and no appeal lies from an order entered upon consent” (Matter of Desmond S., 285 AD2d 994, 994 [2001], lv dismissed 97 NY2d 693 [2002]; see Matter of Culton v Culton, 2 AD3d 1446 [2003]; Matter of Misti Z., 300 AD2d 1147 [2002]; Matter of Cherilyn P., 192 AD2d 1084 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 652 [1993]). Present—Pine, J.P., Wisner, Scudder, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Wyoming County (Michael F. Griffith, J.), entered October 9, 2002. The order held respondent in contempt of a prior order and modified a prior visitation order.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: The order appealed from is based upon a stipulation entered into by the parties and placed on the record in open court, “and no appeal lies from an order entered upon consent” (Matter of Desmond S., 285 AD2d 994, 994 [2001], lv dismissed 97 NY2d 693 [2002]; see Matter of Culton v Culton, 2 AD3d 1446 [2003]; Matter of Misti Z., 300 AD2d 1147 [2002]; Matter of Cherilyn P., 192 AD2d 1084 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 652 [1993]). Present—Pine, J.P., Wisner, Scudder, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.3d 1079, 773 N.Y.S.2d 701, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3089, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hess-v-flint-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack