AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

In the Matter of SIGAL GENZEN, Respondent, v. SAMUEL GENZEN, Appellant.

Ordered that the order of protection and the order are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family Court, and its determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses are entitled to great weight on appeal ( see Matter of Nusbaum v Nusbaum, 59 AD3d 725; Matter of Fleming v Fleming, 52 AD3d 600; Matter of Charles v Charles, 21 AD3d 487). The evidence supports the Family Court's determination that the appellant committed two family offenses of harassment in the second degree, warranting the issuance of the order of protection ( see Family Ct Act § 842; Penal Law § 240.26; Matter of Larson v Gilliam, 49 AD3d 650; Matter of Rankoth v Sloan, 44 AD3d 863; Matter of Dell'Isola v Dell'Isola, 19 AD3d 488). Additionally, the Family Court properly directed the appellant to enroll in and attend a 26-week domestic violence program at the Volunteer Counseling Service of Rockland County ( see Family Ct Act § 842 [g]).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

IN RE OF SIGAL GENZEN v. SAMUEL GENZEN
(Jun 22, 2010)