Court Opinion

ID: 3150533
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-29 14:06:27.944005+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:12:14.163876
License: Public Domain

Lahtinen, J.P.
 

  Appeals from two orders of the Family Court of Clinton County (Lawliss, J.), entered September 6, 2013, which, in two proceedings pursuant to Family Ct Act articles 10 and 10-A, continued placement of the subject children and continued an award of supervised visitation to Timothy Z.
 

  In orders entered in March 2013, Family Court provided
   
   *1172
   
  Timothy Z. with visitation, supervised by petitioner, of his twin children (born in 2008). The requirement that petitioner supervise visitation was continued in the September 2013 orders from which these appeals were taken and Timothy Z. argues that such requirement is not supported by a sound and substantial basis. We recently dismissed as moot his appeals challenging the supervision provision in the March 2013 orders because his visitation rights had been subsequently terminated in unappealed November 2014 orders (129 AD3d 1221, 1222 [2015]). For the reasons set forth therein, the current appeals are also moot.
 

  Garry, Lynch and Devine, JJ., concur.
 

  Ordered that the appeals are dismissed, as moot, without costs.