Plum v. Plum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Plum v. Plum

216 A.D.2d 302, 627 N.Y.S.2d 451, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5921

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

DecidedJune 5, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 216 A.D.2d 302 (Plum v. Plum) 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

Plum v. Plum, 216 A.D.2d 302, 627 N.Y.S.2d 451, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5921 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In a habeas corpus proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, Joellen Plum appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Feiden, J.), dated May 10, 1994, as determined that the courts of the State of Colorado have exclusive subject matter jurisdiction to determine custody of the parties’ two children.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the mother’s contention, the New York Family Court properly declined to exercise its jurisdiction in this case (see, Domestic Relations Law §§ 75-b, 75-d [1] [d] [i]; § 75-g). The record indicates that the father commenced an action for dissolution of the parties’ marriage in the Colorado District Court and that he obtained an order temporarily restraining the mother from removing the parties’ minor children from Colorado. The record also indicates that, when the New York Family Court discussed the issue of jurisdiction with the Colorado District Court, it was clear that the Colorado District Court had already exercised its jurisdiction over the custody matter and that it did not intend to relinquish jurisdiction. Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

In a habeas corpus proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, Joellen Plum appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Feiden, J.), dated May 10, 1994, as determined that the courts of the State of Colorado have exclusive subject matter jurisdiction to determine custody of the parties’ two children.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the mother’s contention, the New York Family Court properly declined to exercise its jurisdiction in this case (see, Domestic Relations Law §§ 75-b, 75-d [1] [d] [i]; § 75-g). The record indicates that the father commenced an action for dissolution of the parties’ marriage in the Colorado District Court and that he obtained an order temporarily restraining the mother from removing the parties’ minor children from Colorado. The record also indicates that, when the New York Family Court discussed the issue of jurisdiction with the Colorado District Court, it was clear that the Colorado District Court had already exercised its jurisdiction over the custody matter and that it did not intend to relinquish jurisdiction. Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 302, 627 N.Y.S.2d 451, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5921, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/plum-v-plum-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack