Matter of Annette R. v. Dakiem E.D.

2020 NY Slip Op 1703, 117 N.Y.S.3d 839, 181 A.D.3d 485
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 12, 2020
Docket11252 -17/18A
StatusPublished

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 1703 (Matter of Annette R. v. Dakiem E.D.) 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
Matter of Annette R. v. Dakiem E.D., 2020 NY Slip Op 1703, 117 N.Y.S.3d 839, 181 A.D.3d 485 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Matter of Annette R. v Dakiem E.D. (2020 NY Slip Op 01703)
Matter of Annette R. v Dakiem E.D.
2020 NY Slip Op 01703
Decided on March 12, 2020
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on March 12, 2020
Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Singh, Moulton, González, JJ.

11252 -17/18A

[*1] In re Annette R., Petitioner-Respondent,

v

Dakiem E.D., Respondent-Appellant.


Law Office of Lewis S. Calderon, Jamaica (Lewis S. Calderon of counsel), for appellant.

Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, New York (Sushila Rao Penrapati of counsel), for respondent.

Kenneth M. Tuccillo, Hastings on Hudson, attorney for the child.



Order, Family Court, New York County (Stephanie Schwartz, Referee), entered on or about April 22, 2019, which denied respondent father's motion to disqualify petitioner mother's counsel, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Referee providently exercised her discretion in denying respondent's motion to disqualify petitioner's counsel. There was no evidence that petitioner's counsel spoke with or interacted with the child regarding matters related to the pending litigation (see Matter of Madris v Oliviera, 97 AD3d 823,

825 [2d Dept 2012]; Rules of Professional Conduct [22 NYCRR 1200.0] rule 4.2).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: MARCH 12, 2020

CLERK



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

Related

Madris v. Oliviera
97 A.D.3d 823 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 1703, 117 N.Y.S.3d 839, 181 A.D.3d 485, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-annette-r-v-dakiem-ed-nyappdiv-2020.