In re Linda K.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Linda K.

151 A.D.2d 574, 542 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7912

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

DecidedJune 12, 1989

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 151 A.D.2d 574 (In re Linda K.) 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 Linda K., 151 A.D.2d 574, 542 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7912 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, nonparty Janette S. appeals from an order of the Family Court, Rock-land County (Stanger, J.), dated November 17, 1987, which, inter alia, imposed certain sanctions based on her alleged contempt of a prior court order.

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

"It is appropriate for an appellate court to inquire into the appealability of the order under review, even where the respondent on the appeal has not specifically requested that the appeal be dismissed” (Glickman v Sami, 146 AD2d 671, citing Leeds v Leeds, 60 NY2d 641; Lincoln v Austic, 60 AD2d 487; 1 Newman, New York Appellate Practice § 3.01 [1]). In the present case, we have examined the record on appeal, and there does not appear to have been any opposition by the appellant to the motion which resulted in the order appealed from. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed (see, CPLR 5511; People v Robbins, 277 App Div 1087 [order imposing fine as punishment for contempt of prior order not appealable where alleged contemnor did not oppose motion]; see also, Tongue v Tongue, 97 AD2d 638, affd 61 NY2d 809; Furci v Furci, 45 AD2d 1003; 7 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac ¶ 5511.10; 10 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 70:25; 1 Newman, New York Appellate Practice § 3.08 [1]). The proper procedure by which to challenge an order entered on default is a motion to vacate the order. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Rubin, 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, nonparty Janette S. appeals from an order of the Family Court, Rock-land County (Stanger, J.), dated November 17, 1987, which, inter alia, imposed certain sanctions based on her alleged contempt of a prior court order.

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

"It is appropriate for an appellate court to inquire into the appealability of the order under review, even where the respondent on the appeal has not specifically requested that the appeal be dismissed” (Glickman v Sami, 146 AD2d 671, citing Leeds v Leeds, 60 NY2d 641; Lincoln v Austic, 60 AD2d 487; 1 Newman, New York Appellate Practice § 3.01 [1]). In the present case, we have examined the record on appeal, and there does not appear to have been any opposition by the appellant to the motion which resulted in the order appealed from. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed (see, CPLR 5511; People v Robbins, 277 App Div 1087 [order imposing fine as punishment for contempt of prior order not appealable where alleged contemnor did not oppose motion]; see also, Tongue v Tongue, 97 AD2d 638, affd 61 NY2d 809; Furci v Furci, 45 AD2d 1003; 7 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac ¶ 5511.10; 10 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 70:25; 1 Newman, New York Appellate Practice § 3.08 [1]). The proper procedure by which to challenge an order entered on default is a motion to vacate the order. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 A.D.2d 574, 542 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7912, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-linda-k-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack