Matter of Russell F. v. Brandon Jay F.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Russell F. v. Brandon Jay F.

120 A.D.3d 1159, 992 N.Y.S.2d 886

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedSeptember 30, 2014

Docket13063

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 120 A.D.3d 1159 (Matter of Russell F. v. Brandon Jay F.) 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 Russell F. v. Brandon Jay F., 120 A.D.3d 1159, 992 N.Y.S.2d 886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Jane Pearl, J.), entered on or about August 9, 2013, which, after a fact-finding hearing in a proceeding brought pursuant to article 8 of the Family Court Act, dismissed the petition for an order of protection, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Family Court properly dismissed the petition, since petitioner failed to establish by a fair preponderance of the evidence that respondent, his brother, had committed any acts warranting an order of protection in petitioner’s favor (see Matter of Everett C. v Oneida P., 61 AD3d 489 [1st Dept 2009]). No basis exists to disturb the Family Court’s findings that respondent and his wife were more credible witnesses than petitioner (id.).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P, Andrias, Moskowitz, ManzanetDaniels and Clark, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County (Jane Pearl, J.), entered on or about August 9, 2013, which, after a fact-finding hearing in a proceeding brought pursuant to article 8 of the Family Court Act, dismissed the petition for an order of protection, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Family Court properly dismissed the petition, since petitioner failed to establish by a fair preponderance of the evidence that respondent, his brother, had committed any acts warranting an order of protection in petitioner’s favor (see Matter of Everett C. v Oneida P., 61 AD3d 489 [1st Dept 2009]). No basis exists to disturb the Family Court’s findings that respondent and his wife were more credible witnesses than petitioner (id.).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P, Andrias, Moskowitz, ManzanetDaniels and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

120 A.D.3d 1159, 992 N.Y.S.2d 886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-russell-f-v-brandon-jay-f-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack