Lewinson v. Lewinson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lewinson v. Lewinson

132 A.D.3d 637, 17 N.Y.S.3d 312

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

DecidedOctober 7, 2015

Docket2015-02902

StatusPublished

This text of 132 A.D.3d 637 (Lewinson v. Lewinson) 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

Lewinson v. Lewinson, 132 A.D.3d 637, 17 N.Y.S.3d 312 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal, by permission, from a temporary order of protection of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Victor J. Alfieri, Jr., J.), dated April 1, 2015. The temporary order of protection directed the plaintiff, inter alia, to stay away from the defendant until and including October 1, 2015.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

A contested order of protection issued by a court, based upon a finding that the subject individual has committed a family offense, is not rendered moot “solely by the expiration of the order” (Matter of Veronica P. v Radcliff A., 24 NY3d 668, 670 [2015]). The temporary order of protection issued in the present case, however, which has expired by its terms, was not predicated upon such a finding and “imposes no enduring consequences on the appellant” (Matter of Baby Boy D. [Adanna C.], 127 AD3d 1079, 1079 [2015]). Accordingly, the appeal from the temporary order of protection must be dismissed as academic.

Dillon, J.R, Chambers, Hall and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal, by permission, from a temporary order of protection of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Victor J. Alfieri, Jr., J.), dated April 1, 2015. The temporary order of protection directed the plaintiff, inter alia, to stay away from the defendant until and including October 1, 2015.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

A contested order of protection issued by a court, based upon a finding that the subject individual has committed a family offense, is not rendered moot “solely by the expiration of the order” (Matter of Veronica P. v Radcliff A., 24 NY3d 668, 670 [2015]). The temporary order of protection issued in the present case, however, which has expired by its terms, was not predicated upon such a finding and “imposes no enduring consequences on the appellant” (Matter of Baby Boy D. [Adanna C.], 127 AD3d 1079, 1079 [2015]). Accordingly, the appeal from the temporary order of protection must be dismissed as academic.

Dillon, J.R, Chambers, Hall and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.3d 637, 17 N.Y.S.3d 312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lewinson-v-lewinson-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack