Court Opinion

ID: 9403869
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-21 19:10:43.39954+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:09.792588
License: Public Domain

Matter of Dodd v Dodd (2023 NY Slip Op 03348)

Matter of Dodd v Dodd

2023 NY Slip Op 03348

Decided on June 21, 2023

Appellate Division, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on June 21, 2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

BETSY BARROS, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
JOSEPH J. MALTESE
DEBORAH A. DOWLING, JJ.

2022-03080
 (Docket No. O-31022-18)

[*1]In the Matter of Ngozi Dodd, respondent,
vNorman G. Dodd, appellant.

Norman G. Dodd, Brooklyn, NY, appellant pro se.
Diana Kelly, Jamaica, NY, for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, Norman G. Dodd appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Rupert V. Barry, J.), dated January 26, 2022. The order, after a hearing, found that Norman G. Dodd had committed acts constituting the family offense of harassment in the second degree and directed the issuance of a final order of protection in favor of Ngozi Dodd and against him to run nunc pro tunc from January 7, 2019, through January 7, 2022.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
An appellant is obligated to assemble a proper record on appeal, which must include any relevant transcripts of proceedings before the hearing court or trial court (see CPLR 5525; Matter of Camarda v Charlot, 208 AD3d 1323, 1323; Matter of Petrosino v Petrosino, 192 AD3d 1037, 1037; Matter of Leacock v Muhammad, 165 AD3d 942, 942). Here, the appellant's failure to provide this Court with all of the relevant transcripts of the Family Court hearing renders the record on appeal inadequate to enable this Court to reach an informed determination on the merits. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed (see Matter of Camarda v Charlot, 208 AD3d at 1323; Matter of Petrosino v Petrosino, 192 AD3d at 1037; see also McIntosh v Genesee Val. Laser Ctr., 121 AD3d 1560, 1561).
BARROS, J.P., CHAMBERS, MALTESE and DOWLING, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Maria T. Fasulo
Clerk of the Court