Tulshi v. Tulshi
| Decision Date | 04 June 2014 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
| Parties | In the Matter of Sadna TULSHI, appellant, v. Omesh TULSHI, respondent. |
In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Ramirez, J.), dated March 1, 2013, which, after a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The allegations in a family offense proceeding must be “supported by a fair preponderance of the evidence” (Family Ct. Act § 832; see Matter of Jarrett v. Jarrett, 102 A.D.3d 695, 956 N.Y.S.2d 898;Matter of Scanziani v. Hairston, 100 A.D.3d 1007, 955 N.Y.S.2d 162;Matter of Daoud v. Daoud, 92 A.D.3d 878, 940 N.Y.S.2d 869;Matter of Mamantov v. Mamantov, 86 A.D.3d 540, 541, 927 N.Y.S.2d 140). “The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family Court, and the Family Court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal” (Matter of Pearlman v. Pearlman, 78 A.D.3d 711, 712, 911 N.Y.S.2d 87 [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of Creighton v. Whitmore, 71 A.D.3d 1141, 898 N.Y.S.2d 585;Matter of Gray v. Gray, 55 A.D.3d 909, 867 N.Y.S.2d 110;Matter of Rankoth v. Sloan, 44 A.D.3d 863, 863–864, 844 N.Y.S.2d 357;Matter of Charles v. Charles, 21 A.D.3d 487, 799 N.Y.S.2d 822). The Family Court's credibility determinations will not be disturbed if supported by the record ( see Matter of Richardson v. Richardson, 80 A.D.3d 32, 43–44, 910 N.Y.S.2d 149;Matter of Luke v. Luke, 72 A.D.3d 689, 689, 897 N.Y.S.2d 655;Matter of Barnes v. Barnes, 54 A.D.3d 755, 755, 863 N.Y.S.2d 758;Matter of Belgrave v. Mingo, 28 A.D.3d 479, 479, 811 N.Y.S.2d 579).
Here, the mother filed a family offense petition alleging, inter alia, that the father had committed the family offenses of disorderly conduct, harassment, and assault. The determination of the Family Court that the mother failed to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the father committed a family offense hinged on issues of credibility, and is supported by the record ( see Matter of Velazquez v. Haffey, 113 A.D.3d 783, 978 N.Y.S.2d 861;Matter of Khan v. Khan, 112 A.D.3d 829, 976 N.Y.S.2d 671;Matter of Chavez–Gonzalez v. Tran, 107 A.D.3d 983, 966...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
D.D. v. A.D.
...enumerated family offenses by a fair preponderance of the evidence. See Family Ct. Act § 812 ; See also, Matter of Tulshi v. Tulshi, 118 A.D.3d 716, 986 N.Y.S.2d 350 (2d Dept.2014). At trial, Wife attempted to establish that Husband committed acts which constitute the family offenses of Har......
-
State v. Kerry K., 2015–08387
...Matter of State of New York v. Floyd Y., 22 N.Y.3d at 110, 979 N.Y.S.2d 240, 2 N.E.3d 204 ; Matter of State of New York v. Walter R., 118 A.D.3d at 716, 987 N.Y.S.2d 104 ).Kerry K.'s remaining contentions are academic in light of our determination.Accordingly, a new trial must be held on th......
-
Pierre v. Dal
...Family Court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal” (Matter of Tulshi v. Tulshi, 118 A.D.3d 716, 716, 986 N.Y.S.2d 350 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Kondor v. Kondor, 109 A.D.3d 660, 660, 971 N.Y.S.2d 21 ), and shoul......
-
Johnson v. Johnson
...753, 754, 30 N.Y.S.3d 923 ; Matter of Giresi–Palazzolo v. Palazzolo, 127 A.D.3d 752, 752, 7 N.Y.S.3d 222 ; Matter of Tulshi v. Tulshi, 118 A.D.3d 716, 716, 986 N.Y.S.2d 350 ; Matter of Cassie v. Cassie, 109 A.D.3d 337, 340, 969 N.Y.S.2d 537 ). "The determination of whether a family offense ......