Legal Opinion

Cunha v. Urias

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 19, 2012PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

By contesting the father’s contempt petition on the merits without objecting that it did not comply with the notice and warning requirements of Judiciary Law § 756, the mother waived any objections to the validity of the petition based upon those requirements (see Matter of Rappoport, 58 NY2d 725, 726 [1982]; Matter of Laland v Edmond, 13 AD3d 451 [2004]; Matter of Restivo v Cincu, 11 AD3d 621 [2004]).

Moreover, contrary to the mother’s contention, the Family *997Court properly, in effect, adjudicated her in contempt for willfully failing to obey the visitation provision of a prior order (see…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McCormick v. AxelrodNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. In re the Estate of RappaportNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. Laland v. EdmondAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  4. Restivo v. CincuAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  5. Rjeoutski v. MavrinaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Cunha v. UriasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  2. Cunha v. UriasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  3. Lomaglio v. LomaglioNew York Supreme Court · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API