Robert V.C. v. Polly V.H.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Robert V.C. v. Polly V.H.

120 A.D.3d 1149, 992 N.Y.S.2d 882

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

DecidedSeptember 30, 2014

Docket13050

StatusPublished

This text of 120 A.D.3d 1149 (Robert V.C. v. Polly V.H.) 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

Robert V.C. v. Polly V.H., 120 A.D.3d 1149, 992 N.Y.S.2d 882 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Ruben A. Martino, J.), entered on or about April 29, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied petitioner father’s objections to the Support Magistrate’s approval of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner father has been litigating this matter for 19 years. Pursuant to Family Court Act § 439 (e), he made a specific objection regarding service of the QDRO (see Matter of Renee XX. v John ZZ., 51 AD3d 1090, 1092 [3d Dept 2008]). However, his objection is unavailing. The Support Magistrate did not err in mailing the father’s copy of the QDRO to the attorney who represented him on the support violation matter. The record indicates that the two matters were consolidated and that the same attorney represented the father on both matters.

*1150 There is no basis for reassigning this case to a different judge or court (cf. Matter of Tequan R., 43 AD3d 673, 679 [1st Dept 2007]).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Andrias, Moskowitz, ManzanetDaniels and Clark, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Ruben A. Martino, J.), entered on or about April 29, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied petitioner father’s objections to the Support Magistrate’s approval of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner father has been litigating this matter for 19 years. Pursuant to Family Court Act § 439 (e), he made a specific objection regarding service of the QDRO (see Matter of Renee XX. v John ZZ., 51 AD3d 1090, 1092 [3d Dept 2008]). However, his objection is unavailing. The Support Magistrate did not err in mailing the father’s copy of the QDRO to the attorney who represented him on the support violation matter. The record indicates that the two matters were consolidated and that the same attorney represented the father on both matters.

*1150 There is no basis for reassigning this case to a different judge or court (cf. Matter of Tequan R., 43 AD3d 673, 679 [1st Dept 2007]).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Andrias, Moskowitz, ManzanetDaniels and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

120 A.D.3d 1149, 992 N.Y.S.2d 882, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-vc-v-polly-vh-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack