St. Hill v. Babb
99 A.D.3d 1009, 952 N.Y.2d 474
Opinion
Under the circumstances of this case, the Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the father’s motion to hold the mother and the maternal grandmother in civil contempt for allegedly violating an order dated April 21, [1010]*10102010 (see Bernard-Cadet v Gobin, 94 AD3d 1030, 1031 [2012]; Matter of Porta v Muratschew, 93 AD3d 850 [2012]; Matter of Kraemer v Strand-O’Shea, 66 AD3d 901 [2009]).
The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.E, Chambers, Hall and Roman, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
St. Hill v. Babb, 99 A.D.3d 1009, 952 N.Y.2d 474 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).
99 A.D.3d 1009 (St. Hill v. Babb) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Kraemer v. Strand-O'Shea
66 A.D.3d 901 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Porta v. Muratschew
93 A.D.3d 850 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Bernard-Cadet v. Gobin
94 A.D.3d 1030 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)