Walker v. Walker

Callahan and Davis, JJ. (dissenting).

We are constrained to dissent in part. We agree with the majority that the evidence adduced at the hearing establishes by “competent proof’ (Family Ct Act § 846-a) that respondent willfully violated the order of protection that prohibited respondent from having any contact with petitioner (see, Matter of Lentino v Lentino, *926185 AD2d 849; Matter of Mills v Mills, 163 AD2d 847). We further agree with the majority that there is no merit to the contention of respondent that the admission into evidence of the correspondence from respondent to the parties’…