Matter of Diallo v Diallo

Matter of Diallo v Diallo 2009 NY Slip Op 08868 [68 AD3d 411] December 1, 2009 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, February 10, 2010

In the Matter of Hawa Diallo, Respondent,
v
Mohammed Diallo, Appellant.

—[*1] Carol Lipton, Brooklyn, for appellant.

Sanctuary for Families, Inc., New York (Lisa S. Vara-Gulmez of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from order, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about March 14, 2008, which, after a fact-finding hearing, granted petitioner an order of protection for one year, unanimously dismissed as moot, without costs.

Because the order of protection has expired, this appeal is moot (see Matter of Jamal A. v Valentina V., 46 AD3d 389 [2007]; Wibrowski v Wibrowski, 256 AD2d 172 [1998]). Although respondent maintains that the matter should be reviewed inasmuch as the issuance of the order would have enduring and serious consequences, here, there is an absence of any permanent and significant stigma that might adversely affect respondent in future proceedings (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 713-714 [1980]; compare Matter of S. Children, 231 AD2d 573 [1996], lv denied 89 NY2d 809 [1997], cert denied 521 US 1125 [1997]).

Were we to reach the merits, we would find that in light of the court's credibility findings, the determination to issue the order of protection was not against the weight of the evidence (see Matter of F.B. v W.B., 248 AD2d 119 [1998]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Acosta and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.