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: James W. McDONALD III, Respondent, v. Jhenna A. REED, Now Known as Jhenna A. Laflair, Appellant. (And Another Related Proceeding.)
Appeal from an order of the Family Court of St. Lawrence County (Berke, J.H.O.), entered October 30, 2008, which, among other things, granted petitioner's application, in two proceedings pursuant to Family Ct. Act article 6, for custody of the parties' child.
Petitioner (hereinafter the father) and respondent (hereinafter the mother) each sought custody of their child. During a hearing conducted by a Judicial Hearing Officer (hereinafter JHO), the parties and the Law Guardian ultimately agreed to a settlement which provided for joint custody, physical placement with the mother and extensive visitation for the father. The terms of the agreement were placed on the record and incorporated in a written order issued by the JHO.
The mother now questions the authority of the JHO to issue the consent order because there is no order of reference in the record pursuant to CPLR 4317. The JHO's authority, however, arose from Judiciary Law article 22 upon assignment by the local administrative judge (see Judiciary Law §§ 851, 853; 22 NYCRR 122.6). The parties consented to have their petitions heard by the JHO (cf. Matter of Heather J., 244 A.D.2d 762, 763, 666 N.Y.S.2d 213 [1997] ), and there is nothing in the record indicating that the JHO was not lawfully assigned to their proceedings. Inasmuch as the consent order was entered pursuant to a stipulated settlement among the parties and the Law Guardian, with the mother and the father both represented by counsel, it is not appealable (see Matter of Sterling v. Dyal, 52 A.D.3d 894, 895, 860 N.Y.S.2d 234 [2008]; Matter of Forbus v. Stolfi, 300 A.D.2d 852, 852, 752 N.Y.S.2d 158 [2002], appeal dismissed and lv. dismissed 99 N.Y.2d 642, 760 N.Y.S.2d 92, 790 N.E.2d 265 [2003] ). Since the mother has not sought to vacate the order or set the stipulation aside (see Matter of Collins v. Brush, 17 A.D.3d 726, 727, 792 N.Y.S.2d 363 [2005]; Dudla v. Dudla, 304 A.D.2d 1009, 1010, 759 N.Y.S.2d 212 [2003] ), her remaining contentions are unavailing.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.
ROSE, J.
PETERS, J.P., KANE, KAVANAGH and McCARTHY, 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.
Decided: December 03, 2009
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)