Cheryl A. B. v. Michael Anthony D.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cheryl A. B. v. Michael Anthony D.

209 A.D.2d 966, 619 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11968

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

DecidedNovember 16, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 209 A.D.2d 966 (Cheryl A. B. v. Michael Anthony D.) 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

Cheryl A. B. v. Michael Anthony D., 209 A.D.2d 966, 619 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11968 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinions

—Order affirmed without costs. Memorandum: There is no basis in the record to disturb the determination that petitioner met her burden of proving respondent’s paternity by clear and convincing evidence (see, Matter of Jane PP. v Paul QQ., 65 NY2d 994, 996; Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v Philip De G., 59 NY2d 137, 141-142). Furthermore, the record establishes that petitioner met her burden of rebutting the presumption of legitimacy (see, Matter of Findlay, 253 NY 1, 7; Johannessen v Johannessen, 148 AD2d 894) by clear and convincing proof of illegitimacy (see, Ghaznavi v Gordon, 163 AD2d 194, 195; Matter of Erskine E. R. F., 100 AD2d 878; Matter of Joan G. v Robert W., 83 AD2d 838, 839). Moreover, the failure of respondent to testify regarding alleged acts of intercourse testified to by petitioner during the critical time period "allow[ed] the trier of fact to draw the strongest inference against him that the opposing evidence in the record permits” (Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v Philip De G., supra, at 141).

All concur except Balio, J. P., and Doerr, J., who dissent and vote to reverse in the following Memorandum.

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

—Order affirmed without costs. Memorandum: There is no basis in the record to disturb the determination that petitioner met her burden of proving respondent’s paternity by clear and convincing evidence (see, Matter of Jane PP. v Paul QQ., 65 NY2d 994, 996; Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v Philip De G., 59 NY2d 137, 141-142). Furthermore, the record establishes that petitioner met her burden of rebutting the presumption of legitimacy (see, Matter of Findlay, 253 NY 1, 7; Johannessen v Johannessen, 148 AD2d 894) by clear and convincing proof of illegitimacy (see, Ghaznavi v Gordon, 163 AD2d 194, 195; Matter of Erskine E. R. F., 100 AD2d 878; Matter of Joan G. v Robert W., 83 AD2d 838, 839). Moreover, the failure of respondent to testify regarding alleged acts of intercourse testified to by petitioner during the critical time period "allow[ed] the trier of fact to draw the strongest inference against him that the opposing evidence in the record permits” (Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v Philip De G., supra, at 141).

All concur except Balio, J. P., and Doerr, J., who dissent and vote to reverse in the following Memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 966, 619 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11968, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cheryl-a-b-v-michael-anthony-d-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack