St. Hill v. Babb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

St. Hill v. Babb

99 A.D.3d 1009, 952 N.Y.2d 474

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

DecidedOctober 24, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 99 A.D.3d 1009 (St. Hill v. Babb) 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

St. Hill v. Babb, 99 A.D.3d 1009, 952 N.Y.2d 474 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 A.D.3d 1009, 952 N.Y.2d 474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-hill-v-babb-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack