Osmundson v. Held-Cummings

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Osmundson v. Held-Cummings

20 A.D.3d 922, 799 N.Y.S.2d 345, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7430

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

DecidedJuly 1, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 20 A.D.3d 922 (Osmundson v. Held-Cummings) 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

Osmundson v. Held-Cummings, 20 A.D.3d 922, 799 N.Y.S.2d 345, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7430 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oneida County (Bernadette T. Romano, J.), entered September 22, 2003 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order dismissed the petition.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed without costs.

[923]*923Memorandum: Petitioner contends that Family Court erred in dismissing his petition seeking modification of two visitation orders with respect to one of his daughters. That daughter is now 18 years of age, however, and thus the appeal must be dismissed as moot. “The right to visitation is an incident of custody and is . . . extinguished when a child reaches the age of majority” (People ex rel. Minardi v Cesnavicius, 208 AD2d 663, 664 [1994]; see Domestic Relations Law § 2; see also Anastasia v Anastasia, 100 AD2d 740 [1984]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oneida County (Bernadette T. Romano, J.), entered September 22, 2003 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order dismissed the petition.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed without costs.

[923]*923Memorandum: Petitioner contends that Family Court erred in dismissing his petition seeking modification of two visitation orders with respect to one of his daughters. That daughter is now 18 years of age, however, and thus the appeal must be dismissed as moot. “The right to visitation is an incident of custody and is . . . extinguished when a child reaches the age of majority” (People ex rel. Minardi v Cesnavicius, 208 AD2d 663, 664 [1994]; see Domestic Relations Law § 2; see also Anastasia v Anastasia, 100 AD2d 740 [1984]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.3d 922, 799 N.Y.S.2d 345, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/osmundson-v-held-cummings-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack