In re Max F.

97 A.D.3d 816, 949 N.Y.2d 107

This text of 97 A.D.3d 816 (In re Max F.) 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 Max F., 97 A.D.3d 816, 949 N.Y.2d 107 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Family Court’s determination that she neglected the subject children is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [A]; Matter of Albert Francis B., 66 AD3d 769 [2009]).

The orders of protection expired by their own terms on July 19, 2011, and the determination of the appeals from those orders would, under the facts of this case, have no direct effect upon the parties (see Matter of Brittany C. [Linda C.], 67 AD3d 788 [2009]; Matter of Edelyn S., 62 AD3d 713, 713-714 [2009]). Accordingly, the appeals from the orders of protection must be dismissed as academic.

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Mastro, A.P.J., Skelos, Florio and Hall, JJ., concur.

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

Related

In re Dutchess
62 A.D.3d 713 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
In re Brittany C.
67 A.D.3d 788 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
In re Albert Francis B.
66 A.D.3d 769 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 A.D.3d 816, 949 N.Y.2d 107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-max-f-nyappdiv-2012.