Matter of Anita L. v Damon N.
2008 NY Slip Op 07065 [54 AD3d 630]
September 25, 2008
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, October 29, 2008


In the Matter of Anita L., Respondent,
v
Damon N.,Appellant.

[*1]Howard M. Simms, New York, for appellant.

The Children's Law Center, Brooklyn (Janet Neustaetter of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal from order, Family Court, Bronx County (Myrna Martinez-Perez, J.), enteredOctober 31, 2007, which granted petitioner mother sole legal and physical custody of herchildren and ordered that respondent father's access to the children be limited to supervisedvisitation, unanimously dismissed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court, Judge and dateof entry, which granted petitioner an order of protection against respondent, unanimouslydismissed, without costs.

On October 31, 2007, respondent walked out of a hearing of petitioner's child custody andfamily offense petitions. This conduct was properly treated by the court as a knowing and willingdefault, as respondent previously had been warned against leaving the courtroom and otherdisruptive behavior. No appeal lies from an order entered upon an aggrieved party's default(CPLR 5511; Figiel v Met Food, 48AD3d 330 [2008]).

Were we to consider the appeals, we would affirm both orders. As respondent was afforded,but chose not to avail himself of, the opportunity to be heard, his right to due process was notviolated (see Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. of City of N.Y. v Remy K.Y., 298AD2d 261 [2002]). Moreover, even in the absence of a full hearing, the court had "sufficientinformation to render an informed decision" as to the best interests of the children (Skidelskyv Skidelsky, 279 AD2d 356, 356 [2001]). Given the undisputed evidence concerningrespondent's behavior, separate fact-finding and dispositional hearings concerning the familyoffense petition were not required (see Matter of Quintana v Quintana, 237 AD2d 130[1997]).[*2]

We have considered respondent's remaining argumentsand find them unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Friedman, Williams andMoskowitz, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.