J.K.S. v. R.P.S.

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 30, 2026
DocketIndex No. 305088/19|Appeal No. 7006M-3165|Case No. 2025-04316|
StatusPublished

This text of J.K.S. v. R.P.S. (J.K.S. v. R.P.S.) 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
J.K.S. v. R.P.S., (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

J.K.S. v R.P.S. - 2026 NY Slip Op 04160
skip to main content

It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.

Law Reporting
Bureau
Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter

J.K.S. v R.P.S.

2026 NY Slip Op 04160

June 30, 2026

Appellate Division, First Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

J.K.S., Respondent,

v

R.P.S., Appellant.

Decided and Entered: June 30, 2026

Index No. 305088/19|Appeal No. 7006M-3165|Case No. 2025-04316|

Before: Scarpulla, J.P., González, Rodriguez, Higgitt, Hagler, JJ.

Navan D. Kaur, guardian for appellant pro se.

[*1]

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael L. Katz, J.), entered on or about June 23, 2025, which declined to sign defendant husband's order to show cause seeking, among other things, dismissal of the action based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable order.

No appeal lies from an order declining to sign an order to show cause, as such an order is ex parte and does not determine a motion made on notice (see CPLR 5701 [a] [2]; Chi Young Lee v Osorio, 184 AD3d 417, 417 [1st Dept 2020]).

Even if the paper were appealable, the issue of plaintiff wife's residency in New York concerns the merits of the divorce adjudication, not the court's competence to adjudicate it (see Lacks v Lacks, 41 NY2d 71, 73 [1976]; Bourjolly v Mouscardy, 85 AD3d 627, 627 [1st Dept 2011]). Moreover, the husband waived the non-subject matter jurisdiction defense by failing to timely raise it and by actively participating in the litigation for approximately five years (see Casey v Casey, 39 AD3d 579, 580 [2d Dept 2007]).

We have considered the remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

M-3165 —S. v S.

Motion for dismissal of the appeal, sanctions, and attorneys' fees, denied.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: June 30, 2026

Court Decisions

All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search

Resources

RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting & Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index

About

About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter

Quick Contact Info

17 Lodge Street

Albany, NY 12207

Phone: (518) 453-6900

Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.

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

Related

Chi Young Lee v. Osorio
2020 NY Slip Op 3186 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Casey v. Casey
39 A.D.3d 579 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Bourjolly v. Mouscardy
85 A.D.3d 627 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
J.K.S. v. R.P.S., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jks-v-rps-nyappdiv-2026.