Matter of Gliksman v. Burekhovich
This text of 2025 NY Slip Op 00218 (Matter of Gliksman v. Burekhovich) 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.
Opinion
| Matter of Gliksman v Burekhovich |
| 2025 NY Slip Op 00218 |
| Decided on January 15, 2025 |
| Appellate Division, Second 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 January 15, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
ROBERT J. MILLER
LILLIAN WAN
PHILLIP HOM, JJ.
2024-04737
(Docket No. O-9241-24)
v
Shapsi Burekhovich, respondent.
Sarah R. Gliksman, Silver Spring, Maryland, appellant pro se.
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Robert A. Markoff, J.), dated May 3, 2024. The order dismissed the petition for lack of standing.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner is the paternal grandmother of the subject child, who was born in 2017. The petitioner filed this family offense petition on behalf of the child, seeking an order of protection against the respondent, the child's maternal uncle. In an order dated May 3, 2024, the Family Court dismissed the petition for lack of standing. The petitioner appeals.
A person under the age of 18 may only appear by one of the representatives enumerated in CPLR 1201. "Unless the court appoints a guardian ad litem, an infant shall appear by the guardian of his [or her] property or, if there is no such guardian, by a parent having legal custody, or, if there is no such parent, by another person or agency having legal custody" (CPLR 1201; see Matter of Cohen v Escabar, 219 AD3d 726, 727). Here, since the petitioner did not have legal custody or legal guardianship of the child, the petitioner did not have standing to bring this proceeding on behalf of the child (see Diaz v Montefiore Med. Ctr. Henry & Lucy Moses Div., 299 AD2d 254, 254-255).
Accordingly, the Family Court properly dismissed the petition.
DILLON, J.P., MILLER, WAN and HOM, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Darrell M. Joseph
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2025 NY Slip Op 00218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-gliksman-v-burekhovich-nyappdiv-2025.