Kagels v. Kagels

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kagels v. Kagels

209 A.D.2d 1020, 619 N.Y.S.2d 996, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12057

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 16, 1994·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We affirm Family Court’s dismissal of the petition for reasons stated in the decision at Family Court (Halpin, J.). We note only that, although the court erred in awarding permanent custody of the parties’ [1021] three children to respondent without holding a hearing (see, Matter of Goodwin v Goodwin, 193 AD2d 1138), reversal is not required. In response to the petition seeking modification of the custody order, the court held a full hearing and addressed the custody issue de novo. Consequently, petitioner was not prejudiced by the court’s error. By failing to object to the court’s decision to hold in abeyance a neglect petition pending against her until resolution of the custody issue, petitioner failed to preserve for review her argument on appeal that the neglect petition should have been resolved first. (Appeal from Order of Niagara County Family Court, Halpin, J.—Custody.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Fallon, Wesley and Doerr, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We affirm Family Court’s dismissal of the petition for reasons stated in the decision at Family Court (Halpin, J.). We note only that, although the court erred in awarding permanent custody of the parties’ [1021] three children to respondent without holding a hearing (see, Matter of Goodwin v Goodwin, 193 AD2d 1138), reversal is not required. In response to the petition seeking modification of the custody order, the court held a full hearing and addressed the custody issue de novo. Consequently, petitioner was not prejudiced by the court’s error. By failing to object to the court’s decision to hold in abeyance a neglect petition pending against her until resolution of the custody issue, petitioner failed to preserve for review her argument on appeal that the neglect petition should have been resolved first. (Appeal from Order of Niagara County Family Court, Halpin, J.—Custody.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Fallon, Wesley and Doerr, JJ.

Kagels v. Kagels, 209 A.D.2d 1020, 619 N.Y.S.2d 996, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12057 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

209 A.D.2d 1020 (Kagels v. Kagels) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related