Matter of Garner v Garner
2011 NY Slip Op 07045 [88 AD3d 708]
October 4, 2011
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, December 7, 2011


In the Matter of Kieverett Garner, Appellant,
v
JudithGarner, Respondent.

[*1]

Zvi Ostrin, New York, N.Y., for appellant.

Ronna Gordon-Galchus, Bayside, N.Y., for respondent.

Jennifer E. Reddin-Eliou, Fresh Meadows, N.Y., Attorney for the Child.

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order ofthe Family Court, Queens County (Seiden, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated December 1, 2009, which, aftera hearing, dismissed his petition, in effect, to modify a prior order of custody and visitation datedNovember 18, 2004, awarding custody of the subject child to the mother and visitation to thefather, so as to award him sole custody of the subject child.

Ordered that the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Queens County, for a reconstructionhearing with respect to those proceedings conducted in the above-entitled case before CourtAttorney Referee Francine Seiden on July 29, 2009, which cannot be transcribed, and thereafterreport to this Court with all convenient speed, and the appeal is held in abeyance in the interim.

The petitioner father contends that the Family Court failed to take the appropriate measuresto protect his right to assigned counsel pursuant to Family Court Act § 262 (a) (see generally Matter of Casey N., 59AD3d 625 [2009]). However, the issue cannot be resolved on the record provided to thisCourt since it does not contain a transcript for the proceedings held on July 29, 2009.Accordingly, we remit the matter to the Family Court, Queens County, for a reconstructionhearing with respect to those proceedings conducted in the above-entitled case before CourtAttorney Referee Francine Seiden on July 29, 2009, which cannot be transcribed, and the appealis held in abeyance [*2]in the interim (see Matter of Hall v Ladson, 18 AD3d753 [2005]; Matter of Olson vOlson, 8 AD3d 285 [2004]; accord CPLR 5525 [d]; cf. Matter of Remy v Mitchell, 60AD3d 860 [2009]; Matter of Jordal v Jordal, 193 AD2d 1102 [1993]). Dillon, J.P.,Belen, Sgroi and Miller, JJ., concur.


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.