In re Barbara S.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Barbara S.

253 A.D.2d 825, 677 N.Y.S.2d 507, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9556

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

DecidedSeptember 21, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 253 A.D.2d 825 (In re Barbara S.) 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

In re Barbara S., 253 A.D.2d 825, 677 N.Y.S.2d 507, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9556 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Freeman, J.), dated June 11, 1997, which dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the order is reversed, without costs or disbursements, the petition is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Queens County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.

Contrary to the findings of the Family Court, the record demonstrates “good cause” to adjourn the fact-finding hearing briefly to secure the attendance of the complainant, who had manifested her cooperation by appearing on a prior scheduled fact-finding hearing date. The presentment agency acted diligently by subpoenaing the witness and telephoning the witness’s home and parents’ place of work (see, Matter of Paublo C., 246 AD2d 352; Matter of Bryant J., 195 AD2d 463). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Freeman, J.), dated June 11, 1997, which dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the order is reversed, without costs or disbursements, the petition is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Queens County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.

Contrary to the findings of the Family Court, the record demonstrates “good cause” to adjourn the fact-finding hearing briefly to secure the attendance of the complainant, who had manifested her cooperation by appearing on a prior scheduled fact-finding hearing date. The presentment agency acted diligently by subpoenaing the witness and telephoning the witness’s home and parents’ place of work (see, Matter of Paublo C., 246 AD2d 352; Matter of Bryant J., 195 AD2d 463). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D.2d 825, 677 N.Y.S.2d 507, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9556, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-barbara-s-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack