Matter of Taylor v. Fusco
This text of 2025 NY Slip Op 01377 (Matter of Taylor v. Fusco) 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.
Opinion
| Matter of Taylor v Fusco |
| 2025 NY Slip Op 01377 |
| Decided on March 12, 2025 |
| 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 March 12, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, J.P.
WILLIAM G. FORD
JANICE A. TAYLOR
JAMES P. MCCORMACK, JJ.
2024-01518
(Docket Nos. O-13548-20/20A/21D, O-11685-21/21A)
v
Luigi Fusco, respondent. (Proceeding No. 1.)
In the Matter of Luigi Fusco, respondent,
v
Jacqueline Taylor, appellant. (Proceeding No. 2.)
The Cassar Law Firm, P.C., Huntington, NY (Christopher J. Cassar of counsel), for appellant.
Law Offices of Gayle R. Rosenbaum, PLLC, Melville, NY, for respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
In related family offense proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, Jacqueline Taylor appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (David A. Morris, J.), dated January 5, 2024. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a fact-finding hearing, dismissed Jacqueline Taylor's family offense petition.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The parties were in an intimate relationship for approximately one year, from August 2019 to August 2020. After the relationship ended, each party commenced a family offense proceeding against the other and obtained a temporary order of protection against the other. In an order dated January 5, 2024, after a fact-finding hearing, the Family Court found that neither party had established a family offense by a fair preponderance of the evidence and dismissed the petitions. Jacqueline Taylor appeals from so much of the order as dismissed her family offense petition.
"In a family offense proceeding, the allegations of the petition must be supported by a fair preponderance of the evidence" (Matter of McClean v McClean, 212 AD3d 624, 625, citing Family Ct Act § 832). The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the hearing court, whose determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal and will not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see Matter of Fiore v Gima, 227 AD3d 1071, 1074-1075; Matter of Petrillo v Bromberg, 227 AD3d 998, 999; Matter of Limanov v Limanov, 225 AD3d 872, 874). Here, the determination that Taylor had not established by a fair preponderance of the evidence that Luigi Fusco committed the family offenses of stalking in the third degree or harassment in the second degree was supported by the record.
Taylor's remaining contention is not properly before this Court.
IANNACCI, J.P., FORD, TAYLOR and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Darrell M. Joseph
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2025 NY Slip Op 01377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-taylor-v-fusco-nyappdiv-2025.