Matter of Ivan R. v. Jabrienna R.

2019 NY Slip Op 832
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 5, 2019
Docket8317
StatusPublished

This text of 2019 NY Slip Op 832 (Matter of Ivan R. v. Jabrienna R.) 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 Ivan R. v. Jabrienna R., 2019 NY Slip Op 832 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

Matter of Ivan R. v Jabrienna R. (2019 NY Slip Op 00832)
Matter of Ivan R. v Jabrienna R.
2019 NY Slip Op 00832
Decided on February 5, 2019
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 February 5, 2019
Friedman, J.P., Mazzarelli, Webber, Kern, Oing, JJ.

8317

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

v

Jabrienna R., Respondent-Appellant.


Geoffrey P. Berman, Larchmont, for appellant.

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



Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Annette Louise Guarino, Referee), entered on or about April 18, 2018, which denied respondent mother's motion to vacate an order granting petitioner father a final order of custody of the subject children upon the mother's default, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the matter remanded for further proceedings as to a determination of the children's best interests and a reappointment of counsel for the children.

The custody order should have been vacated on the ground that the mother demonstrated a reasonable excuse for her default in failing to appear and a meritorious defense (see CPLR 5015[a]).

The matter should be remanded for further proceedings as to a determination of the children's best interests, particularly in light of the fact that the children did not have the benefit of representation of their court-appointed counsel (see e.g. Matter of K.G. v C.H., 163 AD3d 67 [1st Dept 2018]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: FEBRUARY 5, 2019

CLERK



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

Related

§ 5015
New York CVP § 5015
§ 431
New York JUD § 431

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2019 NY Slip Op 832, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-ivan-r-v-jabrienna-r-nyappdiv-2019.