The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York recently upheld a two-year order of protection against S.P., following a domestic dispute with L.S. This decision, made on October 22, 2026, is significant as it reinforces the legal protections available to individuals facing domestic violence and harassment. The ruling comes from Docket No. O-12633/25 and serves as a reminder of the court's commitment to safeguarding victims of family offenses.
The case arose after L.S. petitioned the Family Court in Bronx County for protection against S.P., alleging that he had committed acts of menacing and harassment. The court's ruling is crucial for individuals in similar situations, as it highlights the importance of taking allegations of domestic violence seriously and the legal avenues available to victims.
Background
L.S. and S.P. were involved in a domestic relationship that escalated into a dispute requiring legal intervention. The conflict reached a point where L.S. felt threatened and unsafe in her own home, prompting her to seek an order of protection. The case was initially heard by Family Court Referee Latoya N. Stephens, who conducted a fact-finding hearing to determine the validity of L.S.'s claims.
During the hearing, L.S. provided testimony detailing the incidents that led her to seek protection. She described a situation where, after asking S.P. to leave their home, he physically assaulted her by grabbing her face and shaking her head while screaming. Furthermore, L.S. recounted that S.P. made threats against her life, stating he would “take everybody out with him” if he left. Such statements contributed to L.S.'s fear for her safety, leading to her petition for an order of protection.
The Ruling
The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the Family Court's decision, which found that S.P. committed the family offenses of menacing in the third degree and harassment in the second degree. The court noted that L.S. had established her claims by a fair preponderance of the evidence. The judges emphasized that the Family Court's credibility determinations were entitled to great deference, meaning they trusted the lower court's assessment of the evidence and the parties involved.
In its opinion, the court stated, “Petitioner established by a fair preponderance of the evidence that respondent committed acts that would constitute menacing in the third degree and harassment in the second degree.” The ruling also highlighted that both parties had the opportunity to testify and cross-examine each other, ensuring a fair hearing process. The judges involved in the decision included Manzanet-Daniels, Mendez, Kapnick, Pitt-Burke, and Parker-Raso.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for victims of domestic violence in New York. By upholding the order of protection, the court reinforces the legal framework that allows individuals to seek safety from abusive partners. The decision serves as a precedent for future cases, emphasizing the importance of credible testimony in domestic violence situations and the court's responsibility to protect victims.
The ruling also highlights the legal definitions of menacing and harassment under New York law. Specifically, menacing in the third degree involves intentionally placing someone in fear of physical harm, while harassment in the second degree includes actions that alarm or seriously annoy another person. This case illustrates how these definitions apply in real-life situations, providing clarity for future cases involving similar allegations.
What's Next
While the Appellate Division's ruling affirms the order of protection, it is unclear whether S.P. plans to appeal the decision to a higher court. Details regarding any potential appeals or related cases were not available in the court filing. However, this ruling sets a strong precedent for similar cases, emphasizing the courts' role in addressing domestic violence and protecting victims.