| Matter of Kraemer v Strand-O'Shea |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 07636 [66 AD3d 901] |
| October 20, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of William Kraemer, Appellant, v CathleenStrand-O'Shea, Respondent. |
—[*1]
In a visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, in which the fatherpetitioned, in effect, to hold the mother in contempt for her willful violation of an order ofvisitation of the Family Court, Suffolk County, (Lynaugh, J.), dated November 6, 2007, thefather appeals from an order of the same court dated September 11, 2008, which, after a hearing,dismissed the petition.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
In his petition, the father alleged that the mother willfully violated an order of visitationdated November 6, 2007, and, in effect, sought to hold the mother in contempt for violating thatorder.
"In order to prevail on a motion to punish a party for civil contempt, the movant mustdemonstrate that the party charged violated a clear and unequivocal court order, therebyprejudicing a right of another party to the litigation" (Goldsmith v Goldsmith, 261 AD2d576, 577 [1999]; see Judiciary Law § 753 [A] [3]; Sklover v Sklover, 11 AD3d 527,528 [2004]). The "contempt must be established by clear and convincing evidence" (Matter of Rothschild v Edwards, 63AD3d 744, 745 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 711 [2009]; Massimi v Massimi, 56 AD3d 624[2008]). Here, the father did not meet his burden. Accordingly, the Family Court correctlydismissed the father's petition. Dillon, J.P., Florio, Belen and Roman, JJ., concur.