General

In the Matter of Iskritsa O., Appellant, v. Steven Michael U., Respondent

123 A.D.3d 444996 N.Y.S.2d 527·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2014·NY

Concur — Tom, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Feinman and Gische, JJ.

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

In the Matter of Iskritsa O., Appellant, v Steven Michael U., Respondent. [996 NYS2d 527] [MAJORITY] Order, Family Court, New York County (Mary E. Bednar, J.), entered on or about July 1, 2013, which, in a proceeding brought pursuant to article 8 of the Family Court Act, dismissed the petition seeking an order of protection, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The determination that respondent’s actions did not rise to the family offense of either harassment in the second degree or aggravated harassment in the second degree is supported by a fair preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Everett C. v Oneida P., 61 AD3d 489 [1st Dept 2009]; Penal Law §§ 240.26 [1], [3]; 240.30). There exists no basis to disturb the court’s decision to credit respondent’s version of events over petitioner’s version (see Matter of Peter G. v Karleen K., 51 AD3d 541 [1st Dept 2008]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Feinman and Gische, JJ.