In the Matter of Kraus v. Kraus
| Decision Date | 28 February 2006 |
| Docket Number | 2004-07857. |
| Citation | 26 A.D.3d 494,2006 NY Slip Op 01485,809 N.Y.S.2d 471 |
| Parties | In the Matter of SUSANNA KRAUS, Respondent, v. SHELDON KRAUS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as granted an order of protection until August 23, 2005, is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
Because the order of protection has expired by its own terms, the appeal from so much of the order as concerns the order of protection must be dismissed as academic (see Matter of Cardarelli v. Cardarelli, 277 AD2d 225 [2000]). The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family Court (see Matter of Lallmohamed v. Lallmohamed, 23 AD3d 562 [2005]; Matter of King v. Flowers, 13 AD3d 629 [2004]), and that determination is entitled to great weight on appeal (see Matter of De La Cruz v. Colon, 16 AD3d 496 [2005]), as is the Family Court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses (see Matter of Topper v. Topper, 271 AD2d 613 [2000]; Matter of Hallissey v. Hallissey, 261 AD2d 544 [1999]; Matter of Dendy v. Bonelli, 260 AD2d 633 [1999]). The Family Court properly determined that the petitioner proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the husband committed acts constituting the family offenses of harassment and disorderly conduct warranting the issuance of an order of protection (see Family Ct Act §§ 812, 832; Penal Law §§ 240.20, 240.26 [1]; Matter of Wissink v. Wissink, 13 AD3d 461 [2004]; Matter of Charlene J.R. v. Walter A.M., 307 AD2d 1038 [2003]).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ciccone v. Ciccone
...Lallmohamed, 23 A.D.3d 562, 562, 806 N.Y.S.2d 622; see Matter of Fiore v. Fiore, 34 A.D.3d 803, 823 N.Y.S.2d 902; Matter of Kraus v. Kraus, 26 A.D.3d 494, 495, 809 N.Y.S.2d 471), and where the Family Court is confronted with issues of credibility, its findings are accorded great weight on a......
-
Cassie v. Cassie
...of Hunt v. Hunt, 51 A.D.3d 924, 925, 858 N.Y.S.2d 724;Matter of Rankoth v. Sloan, 44 A.D.3d 863, 844 N.Y.S.2d 357;Matter of Kraus v. Kraus, 26 A.D.3d 494, 809 N.Y.S.2d 471). We therefore reverse the order of protection issued in her favor, which was based solely on the finding that the husb......
-
In the Matter of Hector Morales v. Marma
...issues of child support ( see Matter of Dellagatta v. McGillicuddy, 31 A.D.3d at 550, 819 N.Y.S.2d 69; Matter of Gabriel v. Cooper, 26 A.D.3d at 494, 810 N.Y.S.2d 222), the Family Court should have granted the father's objections to the order denying his motion to vacate his default, and we......
-
Pearlman v. Pearlman
...495 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Nusbaum v. Nusbaum, 59 A.D.3d 725, 874 N.Y.S.2d 378; Matter of Kraus v. Kraus, 26 A.D.3d 494, 495, 809 N.Y.S.2d 471), and the Family Court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal ( see......