Webber v. Carbaugh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Webber v. Carbaugh

210 A.D.2d 718, 621 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12729

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 210 A.D.2d 718 (Webber v. Carbaugh) 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

Webber v. Carbaugh, 210 A.D.2d 718, 621 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12729 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Delaware County (Estes, J.), entered March 25, 1994, which partially granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, to issue an order of protection against respondent.

Petitioner is respondent’s son-in-law. During a conversation between the parties concerning visitation by respondent with his grandson, respondent threatened petitioner with physical violence. Petitioner subsequently brought this proceeding seeking an order of protection against respondent and, after a hearing, Family Court found that respondent had engaged in conduct constituting harassment and issued an order of protection prohibiting abusive or obscene language in conversations with petitioner or threats of violence against him. We find that the evidence at the hearing supports Family Court’s determination. As the trier of fact, Family Court could find that respondent’s statements constituted genuine threats of physical harm.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Casey and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.

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

—Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Delaware County (Estes, J.), entered March 25, 1994, which partially granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, to issue an order of protection against respondent.

Petitioner is respondent’s son-in-law. During a conversation between the parties concerning visitation by respondent with his grandson, respondent threatened petitioner with physical violence. Petitioner subsequently brought this proceeding seeking an order of protection against respondent and, after a hearing, Family Court found that respondent had engaged in conduct constituting harassment and issued an order of protection prohibiting abusive or obscene language in conversations with petitioner or threats of violence against him. We find that the evidence at the hearing supports Family Court’s determination. As the trier of fact, Family Court could find that respondent’s statements constituted genuine threats of physical harm.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Casey and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 A.D.2d 718, 621 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12729, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/webber-v-carbaugh-nyappdiv-1994.