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

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 30, 2014·No. 13050·Published

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.

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

Pincite

120 A.D.3d 1149 (Robert V.C. v. Polly V.H.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related