Neuser v. Neuser

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Neuser v. Neuser

69 A.D.2d 985, 415 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11753

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

DecidedApril 6, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 69 A.D.2d 985 (Neuser v. Neuser) 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

Neuser v. Neuser, 69 A.D.2d 985, 415 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11753 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal unanimously dismissed, without costs, without prejudice to a motion by respondent-appellant to restore. Memorandum: It appears that the Onondaga County Department of Social Services is a necessary party to the appeal inasmuch as it is the assignee of all rights of petitioner-respondent under the support order of April 2, 1975. Although the attorney for the Department of Social Services was named in the notice of appeal, the appeal was never perfected against the department in accordance with CPLR 5525 and 5530. The appeal, therefore, must be dismissed. Respondent-appellant may, however, if so advised, apply pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1000.2 for restoration of the appeal upon a showing of good cause. (Appeal from order of Onondaga County Family Court—contempt.) Present—Simons, J. P., Hancock, Jr., Callahan, Witmer and Moule, JJ.

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

Appeal unanimously dismissed, without costs, without prejudice to a motion by respondent-appellant to restore. Memorandum: It appears that the Onondaga County Department of Social Services is a necessary party to the appeal inasmuch as it is the assignee of all rights of petitioner-respondent under the support order of April 2, 1975. Although the attorney for the Department of Social Services was named in the notice of appeal, the appeal was never perfected against the department in accordance with CPLR 5525 and 5530. The appeal, therefore, must be dismissed. Respondent-appellant may, however, if so advised, apply pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1000.2 for restoration of the appeal upon a showing of good cause. (Appeal from order of Onondaga County Family Court—contempt.) Present—Simons, J. P., Hancock, Jr., Callahan, Witmer and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 A.D.2d 985, 415 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neuser-v-neuser-nyappdiv-1979.