Matter of Rani v. Ahmad

2020 NY Slip Op 3666
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 1, 2020
DocketIndex No. O-5659-18
StatusPublished

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 3666 (Matter of Rani v. Ahmad) 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 Rani v. Ahmad, 2020 NY Slip Op 3666 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Matter of Rani v Ahmad (2020 NY Slip Op 03666)
Matter of Rani v Ahmad
2020 NY Slip Op 03666
Decided on July 1, 2020
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 July 1, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P.
JEFFREY A. COHEN
COLLEEN D. DUFFY
VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.

2019-09604
(Index No. O-5659-18)

[*1]In the Matter of Salma Rani, appellant,

v

Awais Ahmad, respondent.


Allan D. Shafter, Port Washington, NY, for appellant.



DECISION & ORDER

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Lauren Norton-Lerner, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated June 12, 2018. The order, after a hearing, inter alia, in effect, denied the family offense petition and dismissed the proceeding.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, alleging that the respondent had committed various family offenses against her. After a hearing, the Family Court, inter alia, in effect, denied the family offense petition and dismissed the proceeding. The petitioner appeals.

In a family offense proceeding, the petitioner has the burden of establishing, by a fair preponderance of the evidence, that the charged conduct was committed as alleged in the petition (see Family Ct Act § 832). "The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family Court, and its determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses are entitled to great weight on appeal, such that they will not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record" (Matter of Porter v Moore, 149 AD3d 1082, 1083). Here, we agree with the Family Court's determination, after a hearing, that the petitioner failed to establish, by a fair preponderance of the evidence, that the respondent committed a family offense. Accordingly, we agree with the court's determination, in effect, denying the family offense petition.

MASTRO, J.P., COHEN, DUFFY and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

Matter of Porter v. Moore
2017 NY Slip Op 3182 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 3666, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-rani-v-ahmad-nyappdiv-2020.