Court Opinion

ID: 9367381
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-31 17:07:24.967346+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:59.835222
License: Public Domain

Ellenbogen v Mitreski (2023 NY Slip Op 00392)

Ellenbogen v Mitreski

2023 NY Slip Op 00392

Decided on January 31, 2023

Appellate Division, First 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 and Entered: January 31, 2023

Before: Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Kapnick, Kern, Singh, Scarpulla, JJ. 

Index No. 159342/20 Appeal No. 17320 Case No. 2021-03526 

[*1]Michael Ellenbogen, Plaintiff-Appellant,
vMelissa Mitreski, Defendant-Respondent.

Benjamin Katz P.C., New York (Benjamin Katz of counsel), for appellant.
Melissa Mitreski, respondent pro se.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered August 10, 2021, which denied plaintiff's motion for an order of seizure, preliminary injunction, and temporary restraining order pursuant to CPLR 7102 and 7109, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The motion court applied the proper standard in denying plaintiff's motion by considering the "best interest for all concerned" and finding that the parties jointly acquired the dog in 2009, but, considering the now 13-year-old dog's age, the dog should remain with defendant in New York, where the dog has lived and prospered for most of her life, rather than travel back and forth to Nashville, Tennessee, where
plaintiff resides (see Raymond v Lachmann , 264 AD2d 340, 341 [1st Dept 1999]).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unavailing. 
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: January 31, 2023