Matter of Martin v. Martin
Docket 346 CAF 25-01085
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- New York
- Court
- Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Family
- Disposition
- Dismissed
- Citation
- 2026 NY Slip Op 02761
- Docket
- 346 CAF 25-01085
Appeal from a Family Court order in a Family Court Act article 6 custody modification proceeding
Summary
The Appellate Division, Fourth Department dismissed the father's appeal from a Family Court order that modified a prior custody arrangement and set parenting time. The court concluded the father had received the substantive relief he sought—including the equal parenting time requested—so he was not an aggrieved party and therefore lacked appellate standing. Because the appeal raised no reviewable grievance, the court unanimously dismissed the appeal without costs.
Issues Decided
- Whether the petitioner father is an aggrieved party entitled to appeal after Family Court granted the relief he sought in a custody modification petition
- Whether an appeal must be dismissed when the appellant has received the substantive relief requested
Court's Reasoning
The court applied the rule that an appellant must be aggrieved to have standing to appeal. Because the Family Court granted the father's requested modification, including equal parenting time, he was not aggrieved and thus lacked the legal basis to pursue an appeal. Precedent from this department supports dismissal where the appellant obtained the relief sought.
Authorities Cited
- CPLR 5511
- Matter of Jefferson County Dept. of Social Servs. v Mark L.O.12 AD3d 1037 (4th Dept 2004), lv dismissed 4 NY3d 794 (2005)
- Matter of Cooper v Cooper74 AD3d 1868 (4th Dept 2010)
Parties
- Petitioner
- Carl Martin
- Respondent
- Chelsea Martin
- Attorney
- Thomas L. Pelych
- Attorney
- Vera A. Venkova
- Judge
- Keith D. Kibler
Key Dates
- Appellate decision date
- 2026-05-01
- Family Court order entered
- 2025-05-23
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Comply with Family Court order
Follow the parenting time schedule and other terms set by the Family Court, since the appellate court's dismissal leaves that order in effect.
- 2
Consult family attorney
If you believe there is a legal basis to challenge the order despite this dismissal, speak with your attorney promptly to evaluate any possible procedural remedies or to address enforcement or modification needs.
- 3
Consider alternative relief
If circumstances change or the parenting plan is not working, file a motion in Family Court to seek further modification rather than pursuing an appeal when you are not aggrieved.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The appellate court dismissed the father's appeal because he had already received the custody modification and equal parenting time he asked for, so he is not an aggrieved party allowed to appeal.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The parties to the custody modification—Carl Martin and Chelsea Martin—and their children are affected because the Family Court's modified parenting-time order stands.
- What happens next?
- Because the appeal was dismissed, the Family Court order setting parenting time remains effective; there is no change from this appellate decision.
- Can this dismissal be appealed further?
- The decision explains the appeal was dismissed for lack of standing; further appellate options are limited when an appellant is not aggrieved, but a party could consult counsel about any narrow procedural or jurisdictional avenues.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
Matter of Martin v Martin - 2026 NY Slip Op 02761 Matter of Martin v Martin 2026 NY Slip Op 02761 May 1, 2026 Appellate Division, Fourth Department IN THE MATTER OF CARL MARTIN, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v CHELSEA MARTIN, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department Decided on May 1, 2026 346 CAF 25-01085 Present: Whalen, P.J., Curran, Ogden, Nowak, And Delconte, JJ. THOMAS L. PELYCH, HORNELL, FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT. VERA A. VENKOVA, WILLIAMSVILLE, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN. Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Wyoming County (Keith D. Kibler, J.), entered May 23, 2025, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, inter alia, set out the parenting time for the parties with the children. It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs. Memorandum: We conclude that petitioner father's appeal in this Family Court Act article 6 custody modification proceeding must be dismissed. Inasmuch as the father received the substantive relief requested in his petition for modification of a prior custody order, including the equal parenting time he specified, the father is not an aggrieved party ( see CPLR 5511; Matter of Jefferson County Dept. of Social Servs. v Mark L.O. , 12 AD3d 1037, 1038 [4th Dept 2004], lv dismissed 4 NY3d 794 [2005]; see also Matter of Cooper v Cooper , 74 AD3d 1868, 1869 [4th Dept 2010]). Entered: May 1, 2026 Ann Dillon Flynn