You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Cruz v. Rodriguez

Citations: 96 A.D.3d 838; 946 N.Y.S.2d 480

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; June 13, 2012; New York; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Arcadio Rodriguez appealed an order of protection issued by the Family Court in Queens County, which found him guilty of menacing in the third degree and disorderly conduct under Family Court Act article 8. The order, dated November 16, 2011, required him to stay away from the petitioner until November 16, 2013. The appellate court affirmed the order, concluding that the Family Court's factual determinations were supported by a preponderance of credible evidence. The court noted that the Family Court's assessments of witness credibility are afforded significant deference on appeal. The appeal was found to lack merit, with no substantial grounds to overturn the Family Court's findings. The decision was concurred by Justices Angiolillo, Belen, Roman, and Sgroi.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Review of Family Court Orders

Application: The appeal was found to lack merit, as the appellate court found no substantial grounds to overturn the Family Court's findings.

Reasoning: The appeal was found to lack merit, with no substantial grounds to overturn the Family Court's findings.

Standard of Review for Factual Determinations

Application: The appellate court upheld the Family Court's factual findings, emphasizing the deference given to the Family Court's assessments of witness credibility.

Reasoning: The court noted that the Family Court's assessments of witness credibility are afforded significant deference on appeal.

Sufficiency of Evidence in Family Court Proceedings

Application: The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's order, stating that the factual determinations were supported by a preponderance of credible evidence.

Reasoning: The appellate court affirmed the order, concluding that the Family Court's factual determinations were supported by a preponderance of credible evidence.