Larson v. Gilliam

49 A.D.3d 650, 852 N.Y.2d 808
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 11, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 49 A.D.3d 650 (Larson v. Gilliam) 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
Larson v. Gilliam, 49 A.D.3d 650, 852 N.Y.2d 808 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

Whether the appellant committed family offenses was a disputed factual issue. The determination of the Family Court regarding the credibility of witnesses, as the trier of fact, is entitled to great weight (see Matter of Rankoth v Sloan, 44 AD3d 863 [2007]; Matter of Dancer v Robertson, 38 AD3d 887 [2007]). The fair preponderance of the evidence supports the Family Court’s determination, in effect, that the appellant committed the family offenses of disorderly conduct and aggravated harassment in the second degree, and two separate offenses of harassment in the second degree, warranting the issuance of an order of protection (see Matter of Wallace v Wallace, 45 AD3d 599 [2007]; Matter of Vankeuren v Craft, 39 AD3d 763 [2007]; Matter of Bonsignore v Bonsignore, 37 AD3d 602 [2007]).

The appellant’s contention that the Family Court erred in admitting certain letters into evidence was not preserved for appellate review.

The appellant’s remaining contention is without merit. Spolzino, J.P., Angiolillo, Balkin and Leventhal, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Del Canto v. Behrens
95 A.D.3d 1211 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Minus v. Lannaman
81 A.D.3d 830 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Akter v. Patwary
80 A.D.3d 759 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Genzen v. Genzen
74 A.D.3d 1196 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Schwartz v. Sicular
72 A.D.3d 1101 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Delano v. Desimone
60 A.D.3d 673 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Hasbrouck v. Hasbrouck
59 A.D.3d 621 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Gray v. Gray
55 A.D.3d 909 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Fleming v. Fleming
52 A.D.3d 600 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 A.D.3d 650, 852 N.Y.2d 808, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larson-v-gilliam-nyappdiv-2008.