Toneatti v. Schiavone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Toneatti v. Schiavone

266 A.D.2d 303, 698 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11321

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

DecidedNovember 8, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 266 A.D.2d 303 (Toneatti v. Schiavone) 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

Toneatti v. Schiavone, 266 A.D.2d 303, 698 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11321 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the appeal is from an order of protection of the Family Court, Westchester County (Edlitz, J.), entered October 27, 1998, which, after a hearing, inter alia, revoked the appellant’s license to carry firearms.

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

The question of whether the appellant threatened the use of a deadly weapon (see, Family Ct Act § 842-a [2] [a]) was a disputed factual issue for the court to resolve. As the trier of fact, the Family Court’s determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight (see, Matter of Hendrick v DiRusso, 264 AD2d 523; Matter of Tibichrani v Debs, 230 AD2d 746). Its determination in that regard is not against the weight of the evidence. Therefore, the revocation by the Family Court of the appellant’s license to carry firearms was not improper (see, Family Ct Act § 842-a [2] [a]). S. Miller, J. P., Thompson, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, 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 appeal is from an order of protection of the Family Court, Westchester County (Edlitz, J.), entered October 27, 1998, which, after a hearing, inter alia, revoked the appellant’s license to carry firearms.

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

The question of whether the appellant threatened the use of a deadly weapon (see, Family Ct Act § 842-a [2] [a]) was a disputed factual issue for the court to resolve. As the trier of fact, the Family Court’s determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight (see, Matter of Hendrick v DiRusso, 264 AD2d 523; Matter of Tibichrani v Debs, 230 AD2d 746). Its determination in that regard is not against the weight of the evidence. Therefore, the revocation by the Family Court of the appellant’s license to carry firearms was not improper (see, Family Ct Act § 842-a [2] [a]). S. Miller, J. P., Thompson, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 303, 698 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toneatti-v-schiavone-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack