Kraemer v. Strand-O'Shea
This text of 66 A.D.3d 901 (Kraemer v. Strand-O'Shea) 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.
Opinion
In a visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, in which the father petitioned, in effect, to hold the mother in contempt for her willful violation of an order of visitation of the . Family Court, Suffolk County, (Lynaugh, J.), dated November 6, 2007, the father appeals from an order of the same court dated September 11, 2008, which, after a hearing, dismissed the petition.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
In his petition, the father alleged that the mother willfully violated an order of visitation dated November 6, 2007, and, in effect, sought to hold the mother in contempt for violating that order.
“In order to prevail on a motion to punish a party for civil contempt, the movant must demonstrate that the party charged violated a clear and unequivocal court order, thereby prejudicing a right of another party to the litigation” (Goldsmith v Goldsmith, 261 AD2d 576, 577 [1999]; see Judiciary Law § 753 [A] [3]; Sklover v Sklover, 11 AD3d 527, 528 [2004]). The “contempt must be established by clear and convincing evidence” (Matter of Rothschild v Edwards, 63 AD3d 744, 745 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 711 [2009]; Massimi v Massimi, 56 AD3d 624 [2008]). Here, the father did not meet his burden. Accordingly, the Family Court correctly dismissed the father’s petition. Dillon, J.P., Florio, Belen and Roman, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
66 A.D.3d 901, 886 N.Y.S.2d 641, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kraemer-v-strand-oshea-nyappdiv-2009.