Matter of C.A. v. K.A.

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 11, 2026
DocketDocket No. V-11602/21-21A|Appeal No. 6856|Case No. 2024-06617|
StatusPublished

This text of Matter of C.A. v. K.A. (Matter of C.A. v. K.A.) 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 C.A. v. K.A., (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

Matter of C.A. v K.A. - 2026 NY Slip Op 03724
skip to main content

It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.

Law Reporting
Bureau
Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter

Matter of C.A. v K.A.

2026 NY Slip Op 03724

June 11, 2026

Appellate Division, First Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

In the Matter of C.A., Petitioner-Respondent,

v

K.A. Respondent-Appellant.

Decided and Entered: June 11, 2026

Docket No. V-11602/21-21A|Appeal No. 6856|Case No. 2024-06617|

Before: Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., González, Higgitt, Michael, Chan, JJ.

Marion C. Perry, New York, for appellant.

Larry S. Bachner, New York, for respondent.

[*1]

Appeal from order, Family Court, Bronx County (Erin E. Browne, Ref.), entered on or about September 30, 2024, which, after a hearing, granted the petition to modify the parties' prior custody order and awarded petitioner sole legal and physical custody of the subject child, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

The appeal is rendered moot because the child has reached the age of majority and thus can no longer be the subject of a custody order (see Family Ct Act §§ 651; 119[c]; Matter of Darisa D. v Bienvenida D., 26 AD3d 222, 223 [1st Dept 2006]). We find that no exception to the mootness doctrine applies (see Matter of Ahdawantazalam A. v Georgilia A., 165 AD3d 519 [1st Dept 2018]).

As this Court has determined that the appeal is moot, the application by respondent's assigned counsel to withdraw is granted. We do not reach the issue of whether any nonfrivolous issues could be raised on appeal (see Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; People v Saunders, 52 AD2d 833 [1st Dept 1976]), and instead sua sponte relieve counsel from representation of respondent, as his representation on this appeal has been rendered moot by virtue of this order.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: June 11, 2026

Court Decisions

All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search

Resources

RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting & Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index

About

About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter

Quick Contact Info

17 Lodge Street

Albany, NY 12207

Phone: (518) 453-6900

Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
People v. Saunders
52 A.D.2d 833 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Matter of C.A. v. K.A., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-ca-v-ka-nyappdiv-2026.