Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sanabria v. Medina

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


January 26, 2010

IN THE MATTER OF LUCERO SANABRIA, APPELLANT,
v.
GABRIEL MEDINA, RESPONDENT.

In a proceeding pursuant Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Salinitro, J.), dated November 7, 2008, as denied her objections to an order of the same court (Gartner, S.M.), dated April 9, 2008, denying, after oral argument, her motion to vacate a money judgment dated January 23, 2002, entered upon her default in appearing, with leave to refile the motion under the correct docket number, and denied, as untimely, her objections to an order of the same court (Gartner, S.M.), dated July 11, 2008, which, after a hearing, modified a prior order of child support.

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., RUTH C. BALKIN, JOHN M. LEVENTHAL and PLUMMER E. LOTT, JJ.

(Docket No. V-15268-05)

DECISION & ORDER

ORDERED that the order dated November 7, 2008, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court properly denied the mother's objections to the Support Magistrate's order dated April 9, 2008, denying the mother's motion to vacate a money judgment dated January 23, 2002, entered upon her default in appearing, since the motion was not properly docketed (see 22 NYCRR 205.7[d]). The Family Court properly gave the mother leave to re-file the motion to vacate the judgment under the correct docket number (see 22 NYCRR 205.7[b]).

The Family Court properly denied, as untimely, the mother's objections to the Support Magistrate's order dated July 11, 2008, because the objections were not filed within 35 days of the court's mailing of that order (see Matter of Hodges v Hodges, 40 AD3d 639; Matter of Herman v Herman, 11 AD3d 536; Family Ct Act § 439[e]).

SKELOS, J.P., BALKIN, LEVENTHAL and LOTT, JJ., concur.

20100126

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.