La Rosa v. La Rosa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

La Rosa v. La Rosa

87 A.D.2d 605, 450 N.Y.S.2d 418, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15896

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1982

StatusPublished

This text of 87 A.D.2d 605 (La Rosa v. La Rosa) 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

La Rosa v. La Rosa, 87 A.D.2d 605, 450 N.Y.S.2d 418, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15896 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for a declaratory judgment, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Becker, J.), dated August 10, 1981, which denied his motion for summary judgment and appointed a guardian to represent the interests of defendant Julien La Rosa. Order modified, by adding thereto a provision that defendant Nanette La Rosa is relieved as guardian ad litem for defendant Julien La Rosa. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. It is not clear from the record on appeal whether Justice Becker was aware that defendant Nanette La Rosa had been previously appointed as guardian ad litem for defendant Julien La Rosa. Nevertheless, Special Term’s appointment of an independent guardian to protect the interests of defendant Julien La Rosa was appropriate under the circumstances of this case. Accordingly, defendant Nanette La Rosa is relieved as guardian ad litem. Damiani, J. P., O’Connor, Bracken and Brown, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for a declaratory judgment, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Becker, J.), dated August 10, 1981, which denied his motion for summary judgment and appointed a guardian to represent the interests of defendant Julien La Rosa. Order modified, by adding thereto a provision that defendant Nanette La Rosa is relieved as guardian ad litem for defendant Julien La Rosa. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. It is not clear from the record on appeal whether Justice Becker was aware that defendant Nanette La Rosa had been previously appointed as guardian ad litem for defendant Julien La Rosa. Nevertheless, Special Term’s appointment of an independent guardian to protect the interests of defendant Julien La Rosa was appropriate under the circumstances of this case. Accordingly, defendant Nanette La Rosa is relieved as guardian ad litem. Damiani, J. P., O’Connor, Bracken and Brown, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

87 A.D.2d 605, 450 N.Y.S.2d 418, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15896, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/la-rosa-v-la-rosa-nyappdiv-1982.