Matter of Benitez v. Mendez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Benitez v. Mendez

140 A.D.3d 1158, 33 N.Y.S.3d 756

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

DecidedJune 29, 2016

Docket2015-12363

StatusPublished

This text of 140 A.D.3d 1158 (Matter of Benitez v. Mendez) 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 Benitez v. Mendez, 140 A.D.3d 1158, 33 N.Y.S.3d 756 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County (Alison M. Hamanjian, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated December 14, 2015. The order, without a hearing, temporarily changed the father’s visitation from unsupervised to supervised.

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

The order appealed from expired by its own terms during the pendency of this appeal and was superseded by a subsequent order granting the father’s petition for expanded, unsupervised *1159 visitation. Accordingly, this appeal has been rendered academic. Contrary to the father’s contention, the appeal does not fall within the exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980]; Matter of Hui C. v Jian Xing Z., 132 AD3d 427 [2015]; Matter of Carlos G. [Bernadette M.], 96 AD3d-632, 633 [2012]; Matter of Agina v Agina, 78 AD3d 691 [2010]; Matter of Walker v Bowman, 70 AD3d 1323 [2010]; Matter of Foley [Messina], 150 AD2d 884 [1989]).

Mastro, J.P., Rivera, Sgroi and Maltese, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County (Alison M. Hamanjian, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated December 14, 2015. The order, without a hearing, temporarily changed the father’s visitation from unsupervised to supervised.

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

The order appealed from expired by its own terms during the pendency of this appeal and was superseded by a subsequent order granting the father’s petition for expanded, unsupervised *1159 visitation. Accordingly, this appeal has been rendered academic. Contrary to the father’s contention, the appeal does not fall within the exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980]; Matter of Hui C. v Jian Xing Z., 132 AD3d 427 [2015]; Matter of Carlos G. [Bernadette M.], 96 AD3d-632, 633 [2012]; Matter of Agina v Agina, 78 AD3d 691 [2010]; Matter of Walker v Bowman, 70 AD3d 1323 [2010]; Matter of Foley [Messina], 150 AD2d 884 [1989]).

Mastro, J.P., Rivera, Sgroi and Maltese, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

140 A.D.3d 1158, 33 N.Y.S.3d 756, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-benitez-v-mendez-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack