Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: JONNILYN C., Respondent, v. AMY D., Appellant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Appeal from an order of the Family Court of St. Lawrence County (Efstathia Kyriakopoulos, Referee), entered October 28, 2024, which granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 8, for an order of protection.
Petitioner (hereinafter the mother), who has two children (born in 2020 and 2023), filed a family offense petition against respondent (hereinafter the grandmother) wherein she sought an order of protection against the grandmother. In her petition, the mother claimed that she feared for her safety and that of the children because, among other things, the grandmother had acted in an aggressive and abusive manner toward the mother in front of the children, texted and called her excessively, and contacted the mother's landlord to try to have her evicted. Following an ex parte court appearance, Family Court (Moses, J.) issued a temporary refrain-from order of protection in favor of the mother and the children. On the day that trial was set to commence, the parties agreed to a resolution of the matter whereby a one-year stay-away order of protection would be issued without an admission from or finding of fact against the grandmother. Family Court (Kyriakopoulos, Referee) issued that order, and the grandmother appeals.
The order of protection has expired by its own terms. Given that, and recognizing that “this order of protection was not issued with a finding that the [grandmother] had committed a family offense, [such that] the ‘enduring consequences’ that may result from such a finding do not result here,” this appeal is moot (Matter of Jacob L. v. Heather L., 228 A.D.3d 1191, 1192 n., 214 N.Y.S.3d 501 [3d Dept. 2024], quoting Matter of Smith v. Morrison, 196 A.D.3d 772, 773 n., 151 N.Y.S.3d 484 [3d Dept. 2021]; see Matter of Noelia F. [Noel G.], 204 A.D.3d 1122, 1123, 166 N.Y.S.3d 708 [3d Dept. 2022]). The grandmother has not argued, nor do we find, that the exception to the mootness doctrine applies.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.
Ceresia, J.
Pritzker, J.P., Reynolds Fitzgerald, McShan and Powers, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: CV-24-1876
Decided: December 11, 2025
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)