Hongach v. Hongach

44 A.D.3d 664, 841 N.Y.S.2d 888
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 2, 2007
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 44 A.D.3d 664 (Hongach v. Hongach) 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
Hongach v. Hongach, 44 A.D.3d 664, 841 N.Y.S.2d 888 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

In a visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Sammarco, J.), dated January 10, 2007, as, without a hearing, granted the mother’s motion to dismiss his cross petition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Family Court properly granted, without a hearing, the mother’s motion to dismiss the father’s cross petition to modify the visitation provisions of a prior order granting custody and visitation, as the father failed to allege a material change of circumstances sufficient to warrant a hearing (see Matter of Walberg v Rudden, 14 AD3d 572 [2005]; Matter of Steinharter v Steinharter, 11 AD3d 471 [2004]; Matter of Timson v Timson, 5 AD3d 691, 692 [2004]; Matter of Blake v Vilbig, 288 AD2d 470 [2001]; Matter of Milhollen v Voelpel, 270 AD2d 422, 423 [2000]). Miller, J.P., Skelos, Covello and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Matter of Williams v. Norfleet
140 A.D.3d 1078 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Dana H. v. James Y.
89 A.D.3d 844 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Anwar v. Sani
78 A.D.3d 827 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Flangos v. Flangos
70 A.D.3d 691 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Ross v. Ross
68 A.D.3d 878 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Mennuti v. Berry
59 A.D.3d 625 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Gurewich v. Gurewich
58 A.D.3d 628 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Potente v. Wasilewski
51 A.D.3d 675 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Harry P. v. Cindy W.
48 A.D.3d 1100 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 A.D.3d 664, 841 N.Y.S.2d 888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hongach-v-hongach-nyappdiv-2007.