Noor v. Noor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Noor v. Noor

15 A.D.3d 788, 790 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1906

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

DecidedFebruary 24, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 15 A.D.3d 788 (Noor v. Noor) 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

Noor v. Noor, 15 A.D.3d 788, 790 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1906 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Mugglin, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Schenectady County (Powers, J.), entered February 25, 2002, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 8, for an order of protection.

On January 4, 2002, Family Court entered a temporary order of protection. Thereafter, Family Court entered an amended temporary order of protection. Following a plenary hearing, Family Court issued an order of protection. The orders, respectively, expired July 4, 2002, July 19, 2002, and February 25, 2003. As no further relief has been sought (see Matter of Fisk v Fisk, 274 AD2d 691, 693 [2000]; Matter of Exum v Sims, 254 AD2d 178 [1998]; Matter of Betancourt v Boughton, 204 AD2d 804, 810 [1994]), this appellate challenge to the issuance of the orders of protection is moot as any determination herein will not directly affect the rights of the parties (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980]).

Cardona, EJ., Crew III, Carpinello and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

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

Mugglin, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Schenectady County (Powers, J.), entered February 25, 2002, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 8, for an order of protection.

On January 4, 2002, Family Court entered a temporary order of protection. Thereafter, Family Court entered an amended temporary order of protection. Following a plenary hearing, Family Court issued an order of protection. The orders, respectively, expired July 4, 2002, July 19, 2002, and February 25, 2003. As no further relief has been sought (see Matter of Fisk v Fisk, 274 AD2d 691, 693 [2000]; Matter of Exum v Sims, 254 AD2d 178 [1998]; Matter of Betancourt v Boughton, 204 AD2d 804, 810 [1994]), this appellate challenge to the issuance of the orders of protection is moot as any determination herein will not directly affect the rights of the parties (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980]).

Cardona, EJ., Crew III, Carpinello and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.D.3d 788, 790 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1906, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/noor-v-noor-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack