Matter of Sharice N.G. v. Perry B.

202 N.Y.S.3d 27, 222 A.D.3d 453, 2023 NY Slip Op 06331
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 12, 2023
DocketDocket No. O-01264-23 Appeal No. 1181 Case No. 2023-01050
StatusPublished

This text of 202 N.Y.S.3d 27 (Matter of Sharice N.G. v. Perry B.) 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 Sharice N.G. v. Perry B., 202 N.Y.S.3d 27, 222 A.D.3d 453, 2023 NY Slip Op 06331 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Matter of Sharice N.G. v Perry B. (2023 NY Slip Op 06331)
Matter of Sharice N.G. v Perry B.
2023 NY Slip Op 06331
Decided on December 12, 2023
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 and Entered: December 12, 2023
Before: Kern, J.P., Singh, Kennedy, Mendez, Rodriguez, JJ.

Docket No. O-01264-23 Appeal No. 1181 Case No. 2023-01050

[*1]In the Matter Sharice N.G., Petitioner-Respondent,

v

Perry B., Respondent-Appellant.


Law Office of Thomas R. Villecco, P.C., Jericho (Thomas R. Villecco of counsel), for appellant.

Jay A. Maller, New York, for respondent.



Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Jennifer S. Burtt, Ref.), entered on or about February 9, 2023, which, after a fact-finding hearing, determined that respondent father committed the family offense of harassment in the second degree, and directed him, inter alia, to stay away from petitioner mother until February 8, 2024, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner proved by a fair preponderance of the evidence that respondent committed the family offense of harassment in the second degree (see Family Court Act § 832; Penal Law § 240.26[3]; see also Matter of Everett C. v Oneida P., 61 AD3d 489 [1st Dept 2009]). Petitioner's testimony, which the court found credible, supports the finding that respondent engaged in a course of conduct, by repeatedly threatening to put petitioner and her new partner in a body bag, which served no legitimate purpose, with the intent of seriously annoying or alarming her (see Matter of Rosa G. v Hipolito D., 215 AD3d 571 [1st Dept 2023]). Respondent's intent to commit the family offense of harassment in the second degree is fairly inferable from the surrounding circumstances (see Matter of Tawanda A.A. v Joseph D.A., 188 AD3d 401, 402 [1st Dept 2020]).THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: December 12, 2023



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

Related

Everett C. v. Oneida P.
61 A.D.3d 489 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
202 N.Y.S.3d 27, 222 A.D.3d 453, 2023 NY Slip Op 06331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-sharice-ng-v-perry-b-nyappdiv-2023.