Hughes v. Lane

56 A.D.2d 555, 867 N.Y.S.2d 512

This text of 56 A.D.2d 555 (Hughes v. Lane) 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
Hughes v. Lane, 56 A.D.2d 555, 867 N.Y.S.2d 512 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

— In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Phillips, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated August 13, 2007, which, without a hearing, dismissed, with prejudice, his petition to modify a prior order of the same court dated August 1, 2005.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Family [556]*556Court, Nassau County, for an evidentiary hearing and thereafter a new determination of the petition.

At a proceeding on August 9, 2007 the court questioned the mother under oath. The court then relied, at least in part, on her testimony to resolve the allegations in father’s petition, without also questioning the father under oath, or permitting him to cross-examine the mother. Given the factual discrepancies between the father’s petition and the mother’s testimony, the court erred in dismissing father’s petition without conducting a full evidentiary hearing (see Metzger v Metzger, 240 AD2d 642, 642-643 [1997]; Matter of Klang v Klang, 235 AD2d 476, 477 [1997]; Hizme v Hizme, 212 AD2d 580, 580-581 [1995]). Accordingly, we remit the matter to the Family Court, Nassau County, for an evidentiary hearing to explore whether a material change in circumstances exists warranting a modification of the custody provision of the order dated August 1, 2005, and thereafter a new determination of the petition. Mastro, J.P, Rivera, Covello and Leventhal, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Hizme v. Hizme
212 A.D.2d 580 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Klang v. Klang
235 A.D.2d 476 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Metzger v. Metzger
240 A.D.2d 642 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 A.D.2d 555, 867 N.Y.S.2d 512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hughes-v-lane-nyappdiv-2008.