| Matter of Chu Man Woo v Qiong Yun Xi |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 07999 [100 AD3d 883] |
| November 21, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Chu Man Woo, Appellant, v Qiong YunXi, Respondent. |
—[*1] Mark Brandys, New York, N.Y., for respondent.
In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the husband appealsfrom an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Hepner, J.), dated September 15, 2011, which,after a hearing, dismissed his petition.
Ordered that the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Kings County, for a reconstructionhearing with respect to those proceedings conducted in the above-entitled case on July 27, 2011,which cannot be transcribed, and thereafter to report to this Court with all convenient speed, andthe appeal is held in abeyance in the interim.
The husband contends, among other things, that the Family Court erred in dismissing hisfamily offense petition on the basis that the wife's testimony at the hearing on the petition wascredible. However, the issues raised by the husband on appeal cannot be resolved on the recordprovided to this Court since it does not contain a transcript for the proceedings held on July 27,2011, which included portions of the wife's testimony. Accordingly, we remit the matter to theFamily Court, Kings County, for a reconstruction hearing with respect to those proceedingsconducted in the above-entitled case on July 27, 2011, which cannot be transcribed, and theappeal is held in abeyance in the interim (see Matter of Garner v Garner, 88 AD3d 708, 709 [2011]; Matter of Hall v Ladson, 18 AD3d753 [2005]). Dillon, J.P., Dickerson, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur.