Menu Close


Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
159 A.D.2d 626
(N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Matter of Larkin-King v. King
159 A.D.2d 626

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The order on appeal clearly states that it was rendered pursuant to a stipulation of the parties on the record settling all issues raised by the petition and cross petition for custody. Therefore, the order entered pursuant to the stipulation is an order on consent from which no appeal lies (see, Matter of Schultz v Schultz, 117 A.D.2d 737, 738). The father's remedy is to move to vacate the stipulation (see, Baecher v Baecher, 95 A.D.2d 841).

Additionally, we note that the Family Court had acquired personal jurisdiction over the father as his failure to raise his jurisdictional objections before that court constituted a waiver thereof (see, CPLR 320 [b]; 3211 [e]; Osserman v Osserman, 92 A.D.2d 932). Kunzeman, J.P., Kooper, Sullivan and Miller, JJ., concur.

The case of Larkin-King v. King is provided as part of a free educational service by J. Douglas Barics, attorney at law, for reference only. Cases such as Larkin may be overruled by subsequent decisions, different judicial departments may have different controlling case law, and the level of the court deciding each case will determine whether it is controlling law or not. Larkin-King v. King is presented here to help illustrate how the law works in general, but for specific legal matters, an attorney should be consulted.

If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact Mr. Barics at or (631) 864-2600. For more articles and information, please visit