Plissner v. Louie

194 A.D.3d 820

143 N.Y.S.3d 913 (Mem)

In the Matter of Ian PLISSNER, respondent,

v.Mary LOUIE, appellant.

2020–04143

Docket No. O–3272/19

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Submitted—April 19, 2021

May 12, 2021

Francine Scotto, Staten Island, NY, for appellant.

CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, HECTOR D. LASALLE, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, Mary Louie appeals from an order of protection of the Family Court, Richmond County (Peter F. DeLizzo, J.), dated February 14, 2020. The order of protection, after a hearing, upon a decision of the same court dated February 14, 2020, finding that Mary Louie committed the family offense of harassment in the second degree, directed her, inter alia, to refrain from assaulting, stalking, or harassing Ian Plissner until and including February 13, 2021.

ORDERED that the order of protection is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

In July 2019, the petitioner filed a family offense petition seeking an order of protection against the appellant. Following a hearing, the Family Court determined that the appellant's conduct constituted the family offense of harassment in the second degree. The court issued an order of protection directing the appellant, inter alia, to refrain from assaulting, stalking, or harassing Ian Plissner until and including February 13, 2021.

Although the order of protection expired by its own terms on February 13, 2021, the appeal from that order has not been rendered academic in light of the enduring consequences which may flow from a finding that the appellant committed a family offense (see Matter of Veronica P. v. Radcliff A., 24 N.Y.3d 668, 673, 3 N.Y.S.3d 288, 26 N.E.3d 1143 ; Matter of Stringer v. Grant, 187 A.D.3d 1198, 134 N.Y.S.3d 361 ).

"In a family offense proceeding, the petitioner has the burden of establishing the offense by a fair preponderance of the evidence" ( Matter of Harris v. Harris–Olayinka, 181 A.D.3d 605, 605, 117 N.Y.S.3d 619 ; see Family Ct Act § 832 ). " ‘The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the hearing court’ " ( Matter of Kaur v. Singh, 73 A.D.3d 1178, 1178, 900 N.Y.S.2d 895, quoting Matter of Creighton v. Whitmore, 71 A.D.3d 1141, 1141, 898 N.Y.S.2d 585 ). "The Family Court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal and will not be disturbed if supported by the record" ( Matter of Rall v. Phillips, 177 A.D.3d 641, 642, 109 N.Y.S.3d 875 ).

Here, a fair preponderance of the evidence adduced at the hearing established that the appellant committed the family offense of harassment in...