Territo v. Keane

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Territo v. Keane

55 A.D.3d 744, 864 N.Y.S.2d 789

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 14, 2008·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the husband appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Simeone, J.), dated November 14, 2007, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) to vacate an order of protection of the same court dated January 31, 2007, entered upon his default in appearing for a hearing.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court properly denied the husband’s motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) to vacate an order of protection entered upon his default in appearing for a hearing on the wife’s [745]*745family offense petition. The husband demonstrated neither a reasonable excuse for his default nor a meritorious defense to the petition (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Atwater v Mace, 39 AD3d 573 [2007]; Matter of Thomas v Coombs, 290 AD2d 512 [2002]; Matter of Ashley Marie M., 287 AD2d 333 [2001]; Matter of Nathalie A., 145 AD2d 629, 630 [1988]; see also Durr v New York Community Hosp., 43 AD3d 388 [2007]; Matter of Joosten v Joosten, 32 AD3d 1030 [2006]).

The husband’s remaining contention is not properly before this Court. Skelos, J.E, Fisher, Dickerson and Belen, JJ., concur.

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

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the husband appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Simeone, J.), dated November 14, 2007, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) to vacate an order of protection of the same court dated January 31, 2007, entered upon his default in appearing for a hearing.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court properly denied the husband’s motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) to vacate an order of protection entered upon his default in appearing for a hearing on the wife’s [745]*745family offense petition. The husband demonstrated neither a reasonable excuse for his default nor a meritorious defense to the petition (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Atwater v Mace, 39 AD3d 573 [2007]; Matter of Thomas v Coombs, 290 AD2d 512 [2002]; Matter of Ashley Marie M., 287 AD2d 333 [2001]; Matter of Nathalie A., 145 AD2d 629, 630 [1988]; see also Durr v New York Community Hosp., 43 AD3d 388 [2007]; Matter of Joosten v Joosten, 32 AD3d 1030 [2006]).

The husband’s remaining contention is not properly before this Court. Skelos, J.E, Fisher, Dickerson and Belen, JJ., concur.

Territo v. Keane, 55 A.D.3d 744, 864 N.Y.S.2d 789 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

55 A.D.3d 744 (Territo v. Keane) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related