Marrero v. Johnson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Marrero v. Johnson

89 A.D.3d 596, 933 N.Y.2d 29

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

DecidedNovember 22, 2011

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 89 A.D.3d 596 (Marrero v. Johnson) 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

Marrero v. Johnson, 89 A.D.3d 596, 933 N.Y.2d 29 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Family Court found that respondent committed assault in the second and third degrees, harassment in the first and second degrees, menacing in the second degree, and disorderly conduct, offenses enumerated in Family Court Act § 812. Thus, the court had jurisdiction over this family offense proceeding and properly issued the order of protection.

Repeated acts of domestic violence by respondent toward [597]*597petitioner and the child were proved by a preponderance of the evidence and provide the requisite sound and substantial basis for the court’s conclusion that supervised visitation with respondent would be in the best interests of the child (see Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1] [a]; see Matter of Rodriguez v Guerra, 28 AD3d 775 [2006]). We perceive no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations.

We have reviewed respondent’s remaining contentions and find them without merit. Concur — Tom, J.E, Saxe, Sweeny, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

Family Court found that respondent committed assault in the second and third degrees, harassment in the first and second degrees, menacing in the second degree, and disorderly conduct, offenses enumerated in Family Court Act § 812. Thus, the court had jurisdiction over this family offense proceeding and properly issued the order of protection.

Repeated acts of domestic violence by respondent toward [597]*597petitioner and the child were proved by a preponderance of the evidence and provide the requisite sound and substantial basis for the court’s conclusion that supervised visitation with respondent would be in the best interests of the child (see Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1] [a]; see Matter of Rodriguez v Guerra, 28 AD3d 775 [2006]). We perceive no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations.

We have reviewed respondent’s remaining contentions and find them without merit. Concur — Tom, J.E, Saxe, Sweeny, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 A.D.3d 596, 933 N.Y.2d 29, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marrero-v-johnson-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack