Opinion
12311 Dkt. No. V-21327-18 Case No. 2019-3683
11-10-2020
In re VANESSA H., Petitioner-Appellant, v. MICHAEL T., Respondent-Respondent.
The Law Offices of Salihah R. Denman, PLLC, New York (Salihah R. Denman), for appellant.
The Law Offices of Salihah R. Denman, PLLC, New York (Salihah R. Denman), for appellant.
Manzanet–Daniels, J.P., Kapnick, Mazzarelli, Moulton, JJ.
Appeal from order, Family Court, New York County (Marva A. Burnett, Referee), entered on or about April 11, 2019, which dismissed petitioner's custody petition, unanimously dismissed, without costs.
Application by petitioner's assigned counsel to withdraw is granted (see Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 [1967] ; People v. Saunders, 52 A.D.2d 833, 384 N.Y.S.2d 161 [1st Dept. 1976] ). A review of the record demonstrates that there are no nonfrivolous issues that could be raised on this appeal. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, adopted by New York State (Domestic Relations Law § 76–C[2] ), prevented Family Court from exercising jurisdiction once the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe made clear that it would continue to exercise jurisdiction over the matter ( Domestic Relations Law § 76–B ; see Matter of Kawisiiostha N. v. Arthur O., 170 A.D.3d 1445, 97 N.Y.S.3d 329 [3d Dept. 2019] ).
Moreover, petitioner is not an aggrieved party and lacks standing to appeal the dismissal with prejudice of the custody petition. Petitioner was granted the relief she sought, namely, the discontinuance of proceedings (see CPLR 5511 ; Matter of Sherman J. v. Betty J., 156 A.D.3d 557, 65 N.Y.S.3d 701 [1st Dept. 2017] ).