Bovenzi v. Bovenzi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bovenzi v. Bovenzi

305 A.D.2d 671, 759 N.Y.S.2d 886, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5952

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 27, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 305 A.D.2d 671 (Bovenzi v. Bovenzi) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bovenzi v. Bovenzi, 305 A.D.2d 671, 759 N.Y.S.2d 886, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5952 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a paternity proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 5, the putative father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J.), entered June 12, 2002, which, inter alia, denied his motion to vacate an order of filiation of the same court (Buse, H.E.), entered January 13, 1992.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant failed to establish that the mother obtained the order of filiation by engaging in fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct (see CPLR 5015 [a] [3]). Accordingly, the Family Court properly denied his motion.

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., Smith, S. Miller and Adams, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In a paternity proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 5, the putative father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J.), entered June 12, 2002, which, inter alia, denied his motion to vacate an order of filiation of the same court (Buse, H.E.), entered January 13, 1992.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant failed to establish that the mother obtained the order of filiation by engaging in fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct (see CPLR 5015 [a] [3]). Accordingly, the Family Court properly denied his motion.

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., Smith, S. Miller and Adams, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 A.D.2d 671, 759 N.Y.S.2d 886, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5952, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bovenzi-v-bovenzi-nyappdiv-2003.