Summary
This Appellate Division, Second Department decision addresses two appeals taken by a father from temporary orders of protection issued by the Rockland County Family Court. The court dismissed both appeals, ruling that the first order was superseded by the second and imposed no enduring consequences, while the second order was not immediately appealable as of right without leave. The order maintains certain stays on enforcement pending further proceedings or determination of the appeals.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the appeal from the temporary order of protection dated September 7, 2023 should be dismissed as superseded
- Whether the appeal from the temporary order of protection dated January 30, 2024 is appealable as of right
Holdings
- The appeal is dismissed because the order was superseded by the later temporary order and imposes no enduring consequences on the father.
- The appeal is dismissed because the order is not appealable as of right and leave to appeal was not granted.
Key quotations
“The appeal from the temporary order of protection dated September 7, 2023, must be dismissed, as that order was superseded by the temporary order of protection dated January 30, 2024, and imposes no enduring consequences on the father.” (n/a)
“The appeal from the temporary order of protection dated January 30, 2024, must be dismissed, as that order is not appealable as of right, and leave to appeal has not been granted.” (n/a)
Factual background
Joshua Levitin was subject to a temporary order of protection dated September 7, 2023 directing him to stay away from the parties' children and refrain from contact, which was later extended by a second order dated January 30, 2024. He appealed both orders to the Appellate Division.
Procedural history
The father appealed two temporary orders of protection dated September 7, 2023 and January 30, 2024; the Appellate Division dismissed both appeals.