Won affirmance as attorney for the child from order that imposed sanctions upon counsel for his attacks upon counsel.
Matter of Tercjak v Tercjak, 49 AD3d 773 (2nd Dept. 2008)
In an appeal by the mother’s counsel in a custody proceeding where I represented the children in Family Court and on appeal, the Second Department accepted my arguments that Family Court providently exercised its discretion in imposing sanctions and costs upon counsel for the mother, Peter C. Lomtevas, for making frivolous motions to impose sanctions and costs upon the Law Guardian and the father’s counsel. The Court accepted my argument that the record supports the Family Court’s determination that the motions were completely without merit in law or fact, and were made primarily to harass or maliciously injure another in that in support of the motions, Lomtevas submitted, inter alia, affidavits from a doctor that are rife with unfounded, gratuitously offensive, and utterly unacceptable attacks upon counsel for the father, the Law Guardian, and the Family Court.