Lind v. Sepulveda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lind v. Sepulveda

66 A.D.3d 1087, 885 N.Y.S.2d 652

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

DecidedOctober 8, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 66 A.D.3d 1087 (Lind v. Sepulveda) 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

Lind v. Sepulveda, 66 A.D.3d 1087, 885 N.Y.S.2d 652 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Garry, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Rensselaer County (Griffin, J.), entered May 1, 2008, which, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 4, committed respondent to jail for a term of 120 days.

Respondent appeals from an order which committed him to jail for his willful failure to pay child support. His counsel seeks to be relieved of representing him, arguing that no nonfrivolous appellate issues exist. Respondent has already served his jail sentence and solely appealed from the order of commitment. Accordingly, respondent’s appeal has been rendered moot and must be dismissed, and there is no need to consider counsel’s request [1088]*1088to be relieved of his assignment (see Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v Mason, 61 AD3d 1017, 1017-1018 [2009]; see also Matter of Franklin County Dept. of Social Servs. v Grant, 54 AD3d 1103 [2008]; Matter of St. Lawrence County Dept. of Social Servs. v Pratt, 24 AD3d 1050 [2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 713 [2006]).

Mercare, J.R, Lahtinen, Kane and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

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

Garry, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Rensselaer County (Griffin, J.), entered May 1, 2008, which, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 4, committed respondent to jail for a term of 120 days.

Respondent appeals from an order which committed him to jail for his willful failure to pay child support. His counsel seeks to be relieved of representing him, arguing that no nonfrivolous appellate issues exist. Respondent has already served his jail sentence and solely appealed from the order of commitment. Accordingly, respondent’s appeal has been rendered moot and must be dismissed, and there is no need to consider counsel’s request [1088]*1088to be relieved of his assignment (see Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v Mason, 61 AD3d 1017, 1017-1018 [2009]; see also Matter of Franklin County Dept. of Social Servs. v Grant, 54 AD3d 1103 [2008]; Matter of St. Lawrence County Dept. of Social Servs. v Pratt, 24 AD3d 1050 [2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 713 [2006]).

Mercare, J.R, Lahtinen, Kane and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 A.D.3d 1087, 885 N.Y.S.2d 652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lind-v-sepulveda-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack