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: Jeffrey Martin, petitioner-respondent, v. Heather Martin, respondent, Danny Wayne Karnes, Jr., appellant.
Submitted—September 2, 2014
DECISION & ORDER
In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Woods, J.), entered June 24, 2013, which, upon his failure to appear at a hearing, and upon the denial of his attorney's application for an adjournment, following an inquest, granted the maternal grandfather's petition for custody of the subject child.
ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed except insofar as it brings up for review the denial of the father's application for an adjournment (see CPLR 5511); and it is further,
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
Since the order appealed from was made upon the appellant's failure to appear, review is limited to matters which were the subject of contest below, namely, the denial of the adjournment request of the appellant's attorney (see Matter of Sacks v. Abraham, 114 AD3d 799, 800; Matter of Kalantarov v. Kalantarov, 109 AD3d 471; Matter of Naomi KK. v. Natasha LL., 80 AD3d 834). Under the facts of this case, the Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the application made by the appellant's attorney for an adjournment (see Matter of Sacks v. Abraham, 114 AD3d 799; Matter of Kalantararov v. Kalantarov, 109 AD3d at 471).
DILLON, J.P., DICKERSON, COHEN and DUFFY, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court
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: 2013–07847 (Docket No. V–4519–12)
Decided: October 01, 2014
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)