Hilchuck v. Grossman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hilchuck v. Grossman

57 A.D.2d 798, 394 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11974

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

DecidedMay 19, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 57 A.D.2d 798 (Hilchuck v. Grossman) 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

Hilchuck v. Grossman, 57 A.D.2d 798, 394 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11974 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County, dated November 19, 1976, so far as appealed from, is unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs and without disbursements, and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this memorandum. This is a proceeding by the father of a child born out of wedlock against the mother [799]*799to determine custody and visitation of the child under article 6 of the Family Court Act. The Family Court awarded sole custody to the mother and fixed visitation rights and provisions for support of the child. Petitioner appealed from the custody and visitation provisions. These provisions were made without a hearing although petitioner requested a hearing, at least as .to custody. It appears that the parties agreed that the child should reside with the mother and agreed as to the father’s visitation rights. However, the court should not have made a determination as to "custody” without a hearing. Concur — Birns, J. P., Silverman, Evans and Capozzoli, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County, dated November 19, 1976, so far as appealed from, is unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs and without disbursements, and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this memorandum. This is a proceeding by the father of a child born out of wedlock against the mother [799]*799to determine custody and visitation of the child under article 6 of the Family Court Act. The Family Court awarded sole custody to the mother and fixed visitation rights and provisions for support of the child. Petitioner appealed from the custody and visitation provisions. These provisions were made without a hearing although petitioner requested a hearing, at least as .to custody. It appears that the parties agreed that the child should reside with the mother and agreed as to the father’s visitation rights. However, the court should not have made a determination as to "custody” without a hearing. Concur — Birns, J. P., Silverman, Evans and Capozzoli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.2d 798, 394 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11974, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hilchuck-v-grossman-nyappdiv-1977.