| Matter of Fitzsimmons v Fitzsimmons |
| Motion No: 2019-07672 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2019 NY Slip Op 78415(U) |
| Decided on August 29, 2019 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department, Motion Decision |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This motion is uncorrected and is not subject to publication in the Official Reports. |
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M265417
E/mm
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
ROBERT J. MILLER
LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.
|
2019-07672, 2019-07674 In the Matter of Michael D. Fitzsimmons, appellant, v Cheryl Fitzsimmons, respondent. (Docket Nos. O-18507-17, V-14103-16/17B, V-14104-16/17B, V-14103-16/19C, V-14104-16/19C
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION ) |
Motion by the appellant for leave to appeal to this Court from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated June 10, 2019, which, inter alia, modified the parties' judgment of divorce dated February 24, 2016, with respect to a parenting time schedule for the parties' children, and an order of the same court, also dated June 10, 2019, appointing a parenting coordinator, to stay the order dated June 10, 2019, which, inter alia, modified the parties' judgment of divorce dated February 24, 2016, and to direct that he have residential custody of the subject children in accordance with the terms of an order of the same court dated November 2, 2018, pending hearing and determination of the appeals from the orders dated June 10, 2019.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition and in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to appeal is denied as unnecessary as the orders are appealable as of right (see Family Ct Act § 1112); and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to stay enforcement of the order dated June 10, 2019, which, inter alia, modified the parties' judgment of divorce dated February 24, 2016, with respect to a parenting time schedule for the parties' children, is granted to the extent that enforcement of so much of the order as modified the judgment of divorce with respect to a parenting time schedule for the parties' daughter and set forth a parenting time schedule for the parties' daughter is stayed and the appellant shall have residential custody of the daughter in accordance with the terms of the order dated November 2, 2018, pending hearing and determination of the appeals, and that branch of the motion is otherwise denied.
BALKIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, MILLER and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court