Matter of Seoane v. Nunez

2020 NY Slip Op 05761, 130 N.Y.S.3d 391, 187 A.D.3d 926
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 14, 2020
Docket2019-03782
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 05761 (Matter of Seoane v. Nunez) 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 Seoane v. Nunez, 2020 NY Slip Op 05761, 130 N.Y.S.3d 391, 187 A.D.3d 926 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Matter of Seoane v Nunez (2020 NY Slip Op 05761)
Matter of Seoane v Nunez
2020 NY Slip Op 05761
Decided on October 14, 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 October 14, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
SHERI S. ROMAN
BETSY BARROS, JJ.

2019-03782
(Docket Nos. V-29341-08/14A, V-29341-08/14B, V-29341-08/14C, V-19966-11/14A, V-19966-11/14B, V-19966-11/14C, V-13206-15)

[*1]In the Matter of Fernando Seoane, petitioner- respondent,

v

Martha Nunez, appellant, et al., respondents.


Elliot Green, Brooklyn, NY, for appellant.

William C. Hoffman, Brooklyn, NY, for petitioner-respondent.

Karen P. Simmons, Brooklyn, NY (Louise Feld and Janet Neustaetter of counsel), attorney for the child.



DECISION & ORDER

In related proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Elizabeth Barnett, J.), dated March 25, 2019. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a hearing, granted those branches of the maternal uncle's motion which were to modify certain provisions of an order of custody and parental access of the same court dated February 16, 2018.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

Since the subject child has turned 18 years of age, he is no longer subject to the jurisdiction of the Family Court over issues of custody and parental access. Accordingly, the appeal should be dismissed as academic (see Matter of Johnson v Schreurs, 177 AD3d 742, 743; Matter of De Oliveira v De Oliveira, 151 AD3d 1062).

AUSTIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, ROMAN and BARROS, 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 Earp v. Kramer
2024 NY Slip Op 05978 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
Spata v. Kelly
195 N.Y.S.3d 101 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 05761, 130 N.Y.S.3d 391, 187 A.D.3d 926, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-seoane-v-nunez-nyappdiv-2020.