In re Alexis B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Alexis B.

292 A.D.2d 604, 739 N.Y.S.2d 622, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3246

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

DecidedMarch 25, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 292 A.D.2d 604 (In re Alexis B.) 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

In re Alexis B., 292 A.D.2d 604, 739 N.Y.S.2d 622, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3246 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Rings County (Porzio, J.), dated June 27, 2000, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court, dated May 8, 2000, entered upon his consent, and upon his default in appearing at the dispositional hearing, directed him to cooperate with agency supervision, complete parenting skills and anger management programs, and comply with an order of protection excluding him from the mother’s home.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court’s order of disposition is not appealable as it was entered upon the appellant’s default (see Matter of Klifton Joshua W., 284 AD2d 474).

The application of the defendant’s assigned counsel for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted, as there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal (see Anders v California, 386 US 738). Smith, J.P., Goldstein, McGinity and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Rings County (Porzio, J.), dated June 27, 2000, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court, dated May 8, 2000, entered upon his consent, and upon his default in appearing at the dispositional hearing, directed him to cooperate with agency supervision, complete parenting skills and anger management programs, and comply with an order of protection excluding him from the mother’s home.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court’s order of disposition is not appealable as it was entered upon the appellant’s default (see Matter of Klifton Joshua W., 284 AD2d 474).

The application of the defendant’s assigned counsel for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted, as there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal (see Anders v California, 386 US 738). Smith, J.P., Goldstein, McGinity and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 604, 739 N.Y.S.2d 622, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-alexis-b-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack