IN RE: MARQUISE T.S. Sr. (2024)

Appeal from final order of custody and visitation, Family Court, Bronx County (Douglas E. Hoffman, J.), entered on or about April 20, 2023, which, on consent of the parties, granted sole legal and residential custody of the subject child to the respondent father with parenting time to the appellant mother (mother), unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable order.

Upon review of the mother's assigned counsel's motion and the record, we find that the subject order is nonappealable and dismiss her appeal.  The mother consented to the final order of custody and is therefore not an aggrieved party within the meaning of CPLR 5511 (see Matter of J.V. [Shelly R.—Erikson P.], 226 A.D.3d 609, 610, 207 N.Y.S.3d 531 [1st Dept. 2024];  Matter of Adrianna M.F. [Shanikqa C.F.], 212 A.D.3d 461, 179 N.Y.S.3d 898 [1st Dept. 2023]);  further, appeal is not the appropriate remedy here (see CPLR 5015[a];  Matter of Jessica M. v. Julio G.R., 176 A.D.3d 584, 585, 108 N.Y.S.3d 863 [1st Dept. 2019]).  Therefore, the application by the mother's assigned counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted.  As such, we do not reach the issue raised by the mother's assigned counsel pertaining to the existence of nonfrivolous issues that could be raised on appeal (see Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 [1967];  People v. Saunders, 52 A.D.2d 833, 384 N.Y.S.2d 161 [1st Dept. 1976]), and instead sua sponte relieve assigned counsel from the representation of the mother, as his representation on this appeal has been rendered moot by virtue of this order.