In re Carlos G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Carlos G.

74 A.D.3d 687, 902 N.Y.S.2d 820

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

DecidedJune 29, 2010

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 74 A.D.3d 687 (In re Carlos G.) 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 Carlos G., 74 A.D.3d 687, 902 N.Y.S.2d 820 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from decision of Family Court, Bronx County [688]*688(Jennifer S. Burtt, Ref.), dated November 9, 2009, which directed petitioner to determine whether the child’s putative adoptive parents desired to maintain an open or a closed adoption, in order to assist the court in determining whether visitation with respondent mother was in the child’s best interests, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable paper.

A “decision” is not an appealable order under CPLR 5512 (a) (see Rodriquez v Chapman-Perry, 63 AD3d 645 [2009]). Moreover, respondent is not an aggrieved party because no determination was made concerning visitation, since the resolution of her motion on that point was contingent on future events. Concur—Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Catterson, McGuire and Román, JJ.

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

Appeal from decision of Family Court, Bronx County [688]*688(Jennifer S. Burtt, Ref.), dated November 9, 2009, which directed petitioner to determine whether the child’s putative adoptive parents desired to maintain an open or a closed adoption, in order to assist the court in determining whether visitation with respondent mother was in the child’s best interests, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable paper.

A “decision” is not an appealable order under CPLR 5512 (a) (see Rodriquez v Chapman-Perry, 63 AD3d 645 [2009]). Moreover, respondent is not an aggrieved party because no determination was made concerning visitation, since the resolution of her motion on that point was contingent on future events. Concur—Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Catterson, McGuire and Román, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 A.D.3d 687, 902 N.Y.S.2d 820, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-carlos-g-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack