Tutak v. Tutak

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tutak v. Tutak

129 A.D.2d 582, 513 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45253

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Tutak v. Tutak. Read the opinion of the Court — 123 A.D.2d 758 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 6, 1987·Published

Opinion

In two support proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the appeal is from (1) an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Barone, J.), entered February 22, 1985, directing the appellant to pay $250 per week temporary support for the petitioner and their child, and (2) an order of the same court (Kaiser, J.), entered October 11, 1985, which, after a hearing, directed the appellant to pay support of $300 per week, plus $75 per week on account of arrears in the total amount of $7,500.

Ordered that the appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

In view of subsequent orders of the Family Court, entered June 25, 1986 and July 1, 1986 respectively, canceling all arrears and suspending all current support, the instant appeals are academic. It also appears that the order entered February 22, 1985 was not appealable as a matter of right (see, Family Ct Act § 1112). Mollen, P. J., Brown, Weinstein, Fiber and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

In two support proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the appeal is from (1) an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Barone, J.), entered February 22, 1985, directing the appellant to pay $250 per week temporary support for the petitioner and their child, and (2) an order of the same court (Kaiser, J.), entered October 11, 1985, which, after a hearing, directed the appellant to pay support of $300 per week, plus $75 per week on account of arrears in the total amount of $7,500.

Ordered that the appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

In view of subsequent orders of the Family Court, entered June 25, 1986 and July 1, 1986 respectively, canceling all arrears and suspending all current support, the instant appeals are academic. It also appears that the order entered February 22, 1985 was not appealable as a matter of right (see, Family Ct Act § 1112). Mollen, P. J., Brown, Weinstein, Fiber and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Tutak v. Tutak, 129 A.D.2d 582, 513 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45253 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

129 A.D.2d 582 (Tutak v. Tutak) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related