Vella v. Dillman
| Decision Date | 18 April 2018 |
| Docket Number | 2017–08266,Docket No. O–4583–17 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Philip VELLA, respondent, v. Jodi DILLMAN, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
160 A.D.3d 883
74 N.Y.S.3d 325
In the Matter of Philip VELLA, respondent,
v.
Jodi DILLMAN, appellant.
2017–08266
Docket No. O–4583–17
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Submitted—March 15, 2018
April 18, 2018
Arza Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y. (Steven Feldman of counsel), for appellant.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In a family offense proceeding, Jodi Dillman appeals from an order of protection of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Bernard Cheng, J.), dated July 19, 2017. The order, upon a finding, made after a hearing, that the appellant committed the family offense of harassment in the second degree directed her, inter alia, to stay away from the petitioner until and including July 19, 2018.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner filed a family offense petition in Family Court seeking an order of protection against the appellant, who is his ex-girlfriend. Following fact-finding and dispositional hearings, the Family Court determined that the appellant had committed the family offense of harassment in the second degree and issued an order of protection directing her, inter alia, to stay away from the petitioner until and including July 19, 2018.
The allegations in a family offense proceeding must be "supported by a fair preponderance of the evidence" ( Family Ct. Act § 832 ; see Matter of Porter v. Moore, 149 A.D.3d 1082, 1083, 53 N.Y.S.3d 174 ; Matter of Acevedo v. Acevedo, 145 A.D.3d 773, 774, 43 N.Y.S.3d 443 ; Matter of Silva v. Silva, 125 A.D.3d 869, 870, 1 N.Y.S.3d 848 ). "The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family Court, and that court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal and will not be disturbed if supported by the record" ( Matter of Richardson v. Richardson , 80 A.D.3d 32, 43–44, 910 N.Y.S.2d 149 ; see Matter of Shank v. Shank , 155 A.D.3d 875, 876, 63...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Livesey v. Gulick
...525, quoting Matter of Davis v. Wright, 140 A.D.3d 753, 754, 30 N.Y.S.3d 923 ; see Family Ct Act § 832 ; Matter of Vella v. Dillman, 160 A.D.3d 883, 883–884, 74 N.Y.S.3d 325 ). " ‘The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family Cou......
-
Howard v. Howard
...degree was based upon its assessment of the credibility of the parties and is supported by the record (see Matter of Vella v. Dillman, 160 A.D.3d 883, 884, 74 N.Y.S.3d 325 ; Matter of Winfield v. Gammons, 105 A.D.3d 753, 963 N.Y.S.2d 272 ). Moreover, the intent to commit harassment in the s......
-
Stringer v. Grant
...parties and is supported by the record (see Matter of Howard v. Howard , 181 A.D.3d at 895, 119 N.Y.S.3d 871 ; Matter of Vella v. Dillman , 160 A.D.3d 883, 884, 74 N.Y.S.3d 325 ). Moreover, contrary to the appellant's contentions, the intent to commit harassment in the second degree was pro......
-
Finn v. Harrison
...and is supported by the record" ( Matter of Howard v. Howard, 181 A.D.3d at 895–896, 119 N.Y.S.3d 871, citing Matter of Vella v. Dillman, 160 A.D.3d 883, 884, 74 N.Y.S.3d 325 and Matter of Winfield v. Gammons, 105 A.D.3d 753, 963 N.Y.S.2d 272 ). Moreover, contrary to the appellant's content......