Londraville v. Londraville
275 A.D.2d 988, 715 N.Y.S.2d 197, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9764
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 29, 2000·Published
Opinion
—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated in the decision at Family Court (Schwerzmann, J.). The record, viewed in its totality, establishes that respondent received meaningful representation (see, Matter of Dingman v Purdy, 221 AD2d 817, 818). (Appeal from Order of Jefferson County Family Court, Schwerzmann, J. — Custody.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Wisner, Kehoe and Balio, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Londraville v. Londraville, 275 A.D.2d 988, 715 N.Y.S.2d 197, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9764 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).
275 A.D.2d 988 (Londraville v. Londraville) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Dingman v. Purdy
221 A.D.2d 817 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)