New York Consolidated Laws
N.Y. Domestic Relations Law § 2 (2026)
Definitions
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NY-LEGnysenate.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 2. Definitions. A "minor" or "infant", as used in this chapter, is a person under the age of eighteen years.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: Matter of Sayeh R., 693 N.E.2d 724 (N.Y. 1997).
Matter of Sayeh R., 693 N.E.2d 724 (N.Y. 1997). “Indeed, petitioner concedes that the daughter is no longer subject to custody orders issued in either New York or Florida since she is over 18 years old ( see , Domestic Relations Law § 2; Fla Stat Annot § 743.”
The People v. Anthony Badalamenti, 54 N.E.3d 32 (N.Y. 2016). “Some criticisms of the vicarious consent doctrine have emerged in the legal literature; it has been suggested 4 A minor is "a person under the age of eighteen years" (Domestic Relations Law § 2). - 15 - - 16 - No.”
People v. Salaam, 629 N.E.2d 371 (N.Y. 1993). “None of these statutory provisions, however, negate the elemental fact that defendant was, at most, 16 years old and, under our State's law, an infant for most purposes ( see, e.”
Pizzuto v. Pizzuto, 162 A.D.2d 443 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990). “With regard to subdivision (g) of the third decretal paragraph regarding the defendant’s visitation with the parties’ daughter, we note that the dispute is academic because the daughter has reached the age of majority (see, Domestic Relations Law § 2; Leff v Leff, 144 AD2d 544,…”
Carnese v. Wiegert, 273 A.D.2d 554 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000). “Second, we observe that two of the children have reached the age of majority during the pendency of these proceedings, thereby rendering any issue of modification of custody or visitation as to them moot (see, Domestic Relations Law § 2; Family Ct Act § 119 [c]; Palmer v Palmer,…”
Shaikh v. LaToya Waiters, 185 Misc. 2d 52 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2000). “Children, 160 Misc 2d 298, 301 [Fam Ct, Kings County 1994]; Domestic Relations Law § 2; CPLR 105 [j]).”
Goldberg v. Goldberg, 300 A.D.2d 585 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002). “Ordered that the appeal from the order concerning the parties’ son Jason is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements; and it is further, Ordered that the order concerning the parties’ son Justin is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.”
Berk v. Berk, 170 A.D.2d 564 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991). “In addition, we note that, because the plaintiff’s son has now reached the age of majority, her appeal concerning visitation issues is dismissed as academic (see, Domestic Relations Law § 2; Pizzuto v Pizzuto, 162 AD2d 443 ; Leff v Leff, 144 AD2d 544 ; Anastasia v Anastasia, 100…”
City of New York v. Stringfellow's of New York, Ltd., 253 A.D.2d 110 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999). “An infant is defined by statute in New York as a person under the age of 18 years (Domestic Relations Law § 2). Infancy, since common-law times and most likely long before, is a legal disability and an infant, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, is universally considered…”
Osmundson v. Held-Cummings, 20 A.D.3d 922 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005). “Minardi v Cesnavicius, 208 AD2d 663, 664 [1994]; see Domestic Relations Law § 2; see also Anastasia v Anastasia, 100 AD2d 740 [1984]).”
Lazaro v. Lazaro, 227 A.D.2d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). “The parties’ 18-year-old son, having attained the age of majority, can no longer be the subject of a custody order (see, Domestic Relations Law § 2; Belsky v Belsky, 172 AD2d 576 ).”
Matter of Whitney v. Whitney, 2017 NY Slip Op 7044 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). “During the pendency of these appeals, we dismissed the father’s appeals insofar as they concerned custody of the parties’ older child because he reached the age of 18 (see Domestic Relations Law § 2; Matter of Woodruff v Adside, 26 AD3d 866, 866 [2006]).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.