Clausell v. Salame, 1322
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
| Citation | 65 N.Y.S.3d 873 (Mem),156 A.D.3d 1401 |
| Docket Number | CAF 16–02137,1322 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Jamie T. CLAUSELL, Petitioner–Respondent, v. Flor A. SALAME, Respondent–Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 22 December 2017 |
156 A.D.3d 1401
65 N.Y.S.3d 873 (Mem)
In the Matter of Jamie T. CLAUSELL, Petitioner–Respondent,
v.
Flor A. SALAME, Respondent–Appellant.
1322
CAF 16–02137
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Entered: December 22, 2017
THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER, ROCHESTER (LEIGH ANN CHUTE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT–APPELLANT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CENTRA, CARNI, CURRAN, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Memorandum:
In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, respondent appeals from an order of protection requiring her, inter alia, to remain at least 500 feet from petitioner at all times and to refrain from any communication with petitioner. Initially, we agree with respondent that Family Court erred in disposing of the matter on the basis of respondent's purported default. " ‘A party who is represented at a scheduled court appearance by an attorney has not failed to appear’ " ( Matter of Isaiah H., 61 A.D.3d 1372, 1373, 877 N.Y.S.2d 786 [4th Dept. 2009] ). Here, while respondent was not present at the hearing, her counsel participated in the hearing by, inter alia, cross-examining petitioner. We therefore deem it appropriate to address respondent's substantive contentions raised on appeal (see generally Matter of Cameron B. [Nicole C.], 149 A.D.3d 1502, 1503, 52 N.Y.S.3d 774 [4th Dept. 2017] ).
We reject respondent's contention that the court abused its discretion in denying her request for an adjournment of the hearing. The decision whether to grant a request for an
adjournment rests in the sound discretion of the court (see Matter ofSteven B., 6 N.Y.3d 888, 889, 817 N.Y.S.2d 599, 850 N.E.2d 646 [2006];
Matter of Anthony M., 63 N.Y.2d 270, 283–284, 481 N.Y.S.2d 675, 471 N.E.2d 447 [1984] ). The record...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Paliani v. Selapack, 1156
...evidence that the mother committed the family offense of aggravated harassment in the second degree (see Matter of Clausell v. Salame, 156 A.D.3d 1401, 1402, 65 N.Y.S.3d 873 [4th Dept. 2017] ; Matter of Parameswar v. Parameswar, 109 A.D.3d 473, 474, 970 N.Y.S.2d 793 [2d Dept. 2013] ; see al......
-
Ferratella v. Thomas, 296
...trial court’ " ( Matter of Steven B. , 6 N.Y.3d 888, 889, 817 N.Y.S.2d 599, 850 N.E.2d 646 [2006] ; see Matter of Clausell v. Salame , 156 A.D.3d 1401, 1401–1402, 65 N.Y.S.3d 873 [4th Dept. 2017] ), and here the mother's attorney "failed to demonstrate that the need for the adjournment ... ......
-
People v. Travis, 1319
...156 A.D.3d 140165 N.Y.S.3d 825 (Mem)The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,v.Brian K. TRAVIS, Defendant–Appellant. (Appeal No. 2.)1319KA 14–01084Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.Entered: December 22, 2017LORENZO NAPOLITANO, ROCHESTER, FOR DEFENDANT–APP......
-
Bersin Props., LLC v. Cnty. of Monroe Indus. Dev. Agency, 1464
...Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.Entered: December 22, 2017QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP, NEW YORK CITY 65 N.Y.S.3d 873(ANDREW R. DUNLAP OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT.HARRIS BEACH PLLC, PITTSFORD (PHILIP G. SPELLANE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS–RESPONDEN......
-
Paliani v. Selapack, 1156
...evidence that the mother committed the family offense of aggravated harassment in the second degree (see Matter of Clausell v. Salame, 156 A.D.3d 1401, 1402, 65 N.Y.S.3d 873 [4th Dept. 2017] ; Matter of Parameswar v. Parameswar, 109 A.D.3d 473, 474, 970 N.Y.S.2d 793 [2d Dept. 2013] ; see al......
-
Ferratella v. Thomas, 296
...trial court’ " ( Matter of Steven B. , 6 N.Y.3d 888, 889, 817 N.Y.S.2d 599, 850 N.E.2d 646 [2006] ; see Matter of Clausell v. Salame , 156 A.D.3d 1401, 1401–1402, 65 N.Y.S.3d 873 [4th Dept. 2017] ), and here the mother's attorney "failed to demonstrate that the need for the adjournment ... ......
-
People v. Travis, 1319
...156 A.D.3d 140165 N.Y.S.3d 825 (Mem)The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,v.Brian K. TRAVIS, Defendant–Appellant. (Appeal No. 2.)1319KA 14–01084Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.Entered: December 22, 2017LORENZO NAPOLITANO, ROCHESTER, FOR DEFENDANT–APP......
-
Bersin Props., LLC v. Cnty. of Monroe Indus. Dev. Agency, 1464
...Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.Entered: December 22, 2017QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP, NEW YORK CITY 65 N.Y.S.3d 873(ANDREW R. DUNLAP OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT.HARRIS BEACH PLLC, PITTSFORD (PHILIP G. SPELLANE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS–RESPONDEN......