Langille v. Weber

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Langille v. Weber

61 A.D.2d 823, 402 N.Y.S.2d 339, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10282

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

DecidedFebruary 21, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 61 A.D.2d 823 (Langille v. Weber) 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

Langille v. Weber, 61 A.D.2d 823, 402 N.Y.S.2d 339, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10282 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In a custody proceeding pursuant to article 6 of the Family Court Act, petitioner appeals (1) from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated June 24, 1977, which, inter alia, directed that custody of children be returned to the respondent and (2) by permission, from a further order of the same court, dated July 1, 1977, which, inter alia, denied petitioner-appellant’s motion for a new trial. Orders affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The issues raised by petitioner deal primarily with credibility, an issue left to the trier of fact. Although the Family Court was incorrect in its belief as to the prior criminal record of one witness, the record clearly supports its conclusion that the testimony of two witnesses was suspect. In all other respects the considered opinion of the Family Court is clearly supported by the record. Latham, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

In a custody proceeding pursuant to article 6 of the Family Court Act, petitioner appeals (1) from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated June 24, 1977, which, inter alia, directed that custody of children be returned to the respondent and (2) by permission, from a further order of the same court, dated July 1, 1977, which, inter alia, denied petitioner-appellant’s motion for a new trial. Orders affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The issues raised by petitioner deal primarily with credibility, an issue left to the trier of fact. Although the Family Court was incorrect in its belief as to the prior criminal record of one witness, the record clearly supports its conclusion that the testimony of two witnesses was suspect. In all other respects the considered opinion of the Family Court is clearly supported by the record. Latham, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 A.D.2d 823, 402 N.Y.S.2d 339, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10282, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/langille-v-weber-nyappdiv-1978.