LaRose v. Wright

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

LaRose v. Wright

271 A.D.2d 610, 707 N.Y.S.2d 842, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4252

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

DecidedApril 17, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 271 A.D.2d 610 (LaRose v. Wright) 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

LaRose v. Wright, 271 A.D.2d 610, 707 N.Y.S.2d 842, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4252 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from a order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Cooney, J.), entered April 22, 1997, which, after a hearing, dismissed his petition to modify a consent order of custody and visitation of the same court, entered March 28, 1996.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

[611]*611We have reviewed the record and agree with the father’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738). Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Sullivan and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from a order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Cooney, J.), entered April 22, 1997, which, after a hearing, dismissed his petition to modify a consent order of custody and visitation of the same court, entered March 28, 1996.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

[611]*611We have reviewed the record and agree with the father’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738). Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Sullivan and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 610, 707 N.Y.S.2d 842, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larose-v-wright-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack