Blauvelt v. Blauvelt

• Decision Date: 25 September 1995
• Citation: 631 N.Y.S.2d 760,219 A.D.2d 694
• Parties: Stephanie BLAUVELT, Appellant, v. Joel BLAUVELT, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 760

631 N.Y.S.2d 760

219 A.D.2d 694

Stephanie BLAUVELT, Appellant, v. Joel BLAUVELT, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

Sept. 25, 1995.

Joseph J.A. Tringali, Sr., Eastchester, for appellant.

Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and MILLER, COPERTINO, JOY and FRIEDMANN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In a matrimonial action, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Hickman, J.), dated May 6, 1994, as directed the continuation of the appointment of Charles Brofman as the Law Guardian for the parties' child in any future proceedings, and reserved jurisdiction in the Supreme Court or Family Court of Putnam County for all future proceedings involving the child.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the fourth and fifth decretal paragraphs thereof are deleted.

Since the appointment of a Law Guardian in a custody proceeding is discretionary (see, Matter of Del Sordo v. Maholsic, 199 A.D.2d 1038, 1039, 608 N.Y.S.2d 32; Frizzell v. Frizzell, 177 A.D.2d 825, 576 N.Y.S.2d 439; Matter of Evans v. Evans, 127 A.D.2d 998, 513 N.Y.S.2d 63), the court exceeded its authority in appointing Charles Brofman as the Law Guardian for any and all future proceedings involving the parties' child. The determination as to whether a Law Guardian will be necessary in a future proceeding should be made at the time of the proceeding.

Although a court may retain jurisdiction over the enforcement of the provisions of a divorce judgment (see, Matter of Silane v. Silane, 173 A.D.2d 708, 571 N.Y.S.2d 1015; Matter of H.H. v. P.G., 156 Misc.2d 730, 594 N.Y.S.2d 515), it was improper for the court to direct that all future proceedings involving the child, not necessarily related to the enforcement of the judgment, must be maintained in Putnam County.