Matter of Harper v. Snow

2026 NY Slip Op 00684
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 11, 2026
Docket73 CAF 25-00616
StatusPublished

This text of 2026 NY Slip Op 00684 (Matter of Harper v. Snow) 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 Harper v. Snow, 2026 NY Slip Op 00684 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

Matter of Harper v Snow (2026 NY Slip Op 00684)
Matter of Harper v Snow
2026 NY Slip Op 00684
Decided on February 11, 2026
Appellate Division, Fourth 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 February 11, 2026 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: CURRAN, J.P., BANNISTER, SMITH, OGDEN, AND DELCONTE, JJ.

73 CAF 25-00616

[*1]IN THE MATTER OF JEFFREY R. HARPER, ESQ., PETITIONER-RESPONDENT,

v

BRENT M. SNOW, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT, AND BRANDIE SALISBURY, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.


MICHAEL STEINBERG, ROCHESTER, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

KAMAN BERLOVE LLP, ROCHESTER (GARY MULDOON OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

ANDREW J. DIPASQUALE, ROCHESTER, FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.



Appeal from a decision of the Family Court, Wayne County (Arthur B. Williams, J.), entered October 10, 2024, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The decision, among other things, modified the visitation provisions of a prior order.

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, respondent father purports to appeal from a document denominated "Memorandum-Decision" that modified the visitation provisions of a prior order of custody and visitation. We dismiss the appeal. "[N]o appeal lies from a [mere] decision" (Gunn v Palmieri, 86 NY2d 830, 830 [1995]; see Garcia v Town of Tonawanda, 194 AD3d 1479, 1479-1480 [4th Dept 2021]). The document here is, on its face, a mere decision (see generally CPLR 2219 [a]), and it states in the penultimate sentence that petitioner "shall draft and submit a proposed [o]rder consistent with this decision" (see Pino v Harnischfeger, 42 AD3d 980, 982 [4th Dept 2007]).

Entered: February 11, 2026

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

Garcia v. Town of Tonawanda
2021 NY Slip Op 02966 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Pino v. Harnischfeger
42 A.D.3d 980 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2026 NY Slip Op 00684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-harper-v-snow-nyappdiv-2026.