What did the appellate court decide?

The appellate court dismissed both the appeal and the cross-appeal without costs and did not change the lower court's equitable distribution order.

Who is affected by this decision?

The parties to the divorce, Barbara and Raymond Sciarrino, are affected because the Supreme Court's distribution of marital property remains in place.

Does this decision change the property division?

No. Because the appeals were dismissed, the Supreme Court's September 19, 2024 order remains binding unless other relief is obtained.

Can the parties try to appeal again?

Potentially, but this order does not explain the reasons for dismissal; parties should consult counsel to determine if further appellate remedies or motions are available.

Sciarrino v. Sciarrino

Docket 249 CA 24-02023

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

FamilyDismissed

Filed: Apr 24, 2026 · 1 week ago
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 02560
Docket: 249 CA 24-02023

Appeal and cross-appeal from a Supreme Court order (Livingston County) that equitably distributed marital property in a divorce action.

Summary

The Appellate Division dismissed both the appeal and cross-appeal in a divorce action concerning the equitable distribution of marital property. The appeals arose from a September 19, 2024 Supreme Court order in Livingston County that, among other things, distributed the parties' marital assets. The appellate court issued a unanimous order dismissing both matters without costs and referenced a companion memorandum decision in a related appeal. No substantive reversal or modification of the lower court's distribution is contained in this short order.

Issues Decided

Whether the appellate court would review the Supreme Court's equitable distribution order in the divorce proceeding
Whether either party's grounds for appeal warranted relief from the September 19, 2024 order

Court's Reasoning

The appellate court dismissed both the appeal and cross-appeal without costs, indicating the court found no basis to retain or decide the matters on the merits in the short order. The court relied on a companion memorandum decision in a related appeal (appeal No. 2) for the same disposition, suggesting procedural or jurisdictional reasons or lack of preserved error justified dismissal. Because the order is brief and unanimous, it does not set aside or modify the underlying equitable distribution decision.

Parties

Plaintiff: Barbara Sciarrino
Appellant: Barbara Sciarrino
Defendant: Raymond P. Sciarrino
Respondent: Raymond P. Sciarrino
Judge: John B. Gallagher, Jr.
Judge: Whalen, P.J.
Judge: Bannister
Judge: Smith
Judge: Nowak
Judge: Delconte

Key Dates

Supreme Court order entered: 2024-09-19
Appellate decision entered: 2026-04-24

What You Should Do Next

1
Consult your attorney
Discuss why the appeals were dismissed and whether there are procedural or substantive grounds to seek further relief, such as leave to renew or a motion to reargue.
2
Comply with the Supreme Court order
Unless and until another court orders otherwise, implement the equitable distribution terms set forth in the September 19, 2024 order.
3
Review companion memorandum
Obtain and review the related memorandum decision referenced by the court (appeal No. 2) to understand any reasoning that may apply to these dismissed appeals.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the appellate court decide?: The appellate court dismissed both the appeal and the cross-appeal without costs and did not change the lower court's equitable distribution order.
Who is affected by this decision?: The parties to the divorce, Barbara and Raymond Sciarrino, are affected because the Supreme Court's distribution of marital property remains in place.
Does this decision change the property division?: No. Because the appeals were dismissed, the Supreme Court's September 19, 2024 order remains binding unless other relief is obtained.
Can the parties try to appeal again?: Potentially, but this order does not explain the reasons for dismissal; parties should consult counsel to determine if further appellate remedies or motions are available.

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

Sciarrino v Sciarrino - 2026 NY Slip Op 02560

Sciarrino v Sciarrino

2026 NY Slip Op 02560

April 24, 2026

Appellate Division, Fourth Department

BARBARA SCIARRINO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT,

v

RAYMOND P. SCIARRINO, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 1.)

Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

Decided on April 24, 2026

249 CA 24-02023

Present: Whalen, P.J., Bannister, Smith, Nowak, And Delconte, JJ.

JUST CAUSE, ROCHESTER (HENRY W. JONES, IV, OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT.

KAMAN BERLOVE LLP, ROCHESTER (BRYANNE L. JONES OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

Appeal and cross-appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Livingston County (John B. Gallagher, Jr., J.), entered September 19, 2024, in a divorce action. The order, inter alia, equitably distributed the marital property of the parties.

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal and cross-appeal are unanimously dismissed without costs.

Same memorandum as in
Sciarrino v Sciarrino
([appeal No. 2] — AD3d — [Apr. 24, 2026] [4th Dept 2026]).

Entered: April 24, 2026

Ann Dillon Flynn