Hohn v. Guirand

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hohn v. Guirand

90 A.D.3d 928, 934 N.Y.2d 815

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

DecidedDecember 20, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 90 A.D.3d 928 (Hohn v. Guirand) 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

Hohn v. Guirand, 90 A.D.3d 928, 934 N.Y.2d 815 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

“In analyzing whether nonfrivolous appellate issues exist, it is essential to appreciate the distinction between a potential ap[929]*929pellate argument that is merely meritless or unlikely to prevail and one that is frivolous” (Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252, 258 [2011]). Here, upon this Court’s independent review of the record, we conclude that a nonfrivolous issue exists as to whether the determination of the Family Court is supported by the weight of the evidence (see Matter of Sblendorio v D'Agostino, 60 AD3d 773, 774 [2009]; Matter of Hasbrouck v Hasbrouck, 59 AD3d 621 [2009]). Since a review of the record by the Appellate Division cannot substitute for “the single-minded advocacy of appellate counsel,” assignment of new counsel is warranted (People v Casiano, 67 NY2d 906, 907 [1986]; see Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252, 259 [2011]). Mastro, A.EJ., Angiolillo, Belen and Lott, JJ., concur.

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

“In analyzing whether nonfrivolous appellate issues exist, it is essential to appreciate the distinction between a potential ap[929]*929pellate argument that is merely meritless or unlikely to prevail and one that is frivolous” (Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252, 258 [2011]). Here, upon this Court’s independent review of the record, we conclude that a nonfrivolous issue exists as to whether the determination of the Family Court is supported by the weight of the evidence (see Matter of Sblendorio v D'Agostino, 60 AD3d 773, 774 [2009]; Matter of Hasbrouck v Hasbrouck, 59 AD3d 621 [2009]). Since a review of the record by the Appellate Division cannot substitute for “the single-minded advocacy of appellate counsel,” assignment of new counsel is warranted (People v Casiano, 67 NY2d 906, 907 [1986]; see Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252, 259 [2011]). Mastro, A.EJ., Angiolillo, Belen and Lott, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 A.D.3d 928, 934 N.Y.2d 815, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hohn-v-guirand-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack