Commissioner of Social Service v. George C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Commissioner of Social Service v. George C.

78 A.D.2d 541, 432 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12866

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

DecidedSeptember 22, 1980

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 78 A.D.2d 541 (Commissioner of Social Service v. George C.) 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

Commissioner of Social Service v. George C., 78 A.D.2d 541, 432 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12866 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

In a paternity proceeding, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated April 23, 1979, which, after a hearing, adjudged appellant to be the father of the child in question and directed him to pay support. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The Family Court failed to set forth the essential findings upon which its order was based as required by section 165 of the Family Court Act and CPLR 4213. (See Matter of Hawthorne v Edward S., 31 AD2d 426; Matter of Harris v Doley, 22 AD2d 769.) However, since the record here is complete, this court will make the required findings of fact in the interests of saving judicial time and further litigation. We find that petitioner clearly established that the mother solely dated and engaged in sexual relations with the appellant at the time of conception. Thus, it was demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that appellant is the father of the child. Titone, J. P., Lazer, Gulotta and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

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

In a paternity proceeding, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated April 23, 1979, which, after a hearing, adjudged appellant to be the father of the child in question and directed him to pay support. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The Family Court failed to set forth the essential findings upon which its order was based as required by section 165 of the Family Court Act and CPLR 4213. (See Matter of Hawthorne v Edward S., 31 AD2d 426; Matter of Harris v Doley, 22 AD2d 769.) However, since the record here is complete, this court will make the required findings of fact in the interests of saving judicial time and further litigation. We find that petitioner clearly established that the mother solely dated and engaged in sexual relations with the appellant at the time of conception. Thus, it was demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that appellant is the father of the child. Titone, J. P., Lazer, Gulotta and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 A.D.2d 541, 432 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commissioner-of-social-service-v-george-c-nyappdiv-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack