In re Chattman

57 A.D.2d 618, 393 N.Y.S.2d 768, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11631
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 25, 1977
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 57 A.D.2d 618 (In re Chattman) 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 Chattman, 57 A.D.2d 618, 393 N.Y.S.2d 768, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11631 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Opinion

In a proceeding by an adult adoptee, inter alia, for permission to review and inspect the sealed [619]*619records of her adoption (see Domestic Relations Law, § 114), petitioner appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County, dated December 22, 1975, which denied her application. Order modified, on the facts, by adding thereto, immediately after the word "denied”, the following: "except that petitioner shall be entitled to have access to the file of her • adoption to review and inspect her medical records and those of her natural parents, and any other material therein relating to genetic or hereditary conditions.” As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Petitioner is a married woman and is thinking of starting her own family. Her concern or preoccupation with the possibility of some genetic or hereditary factor in her background which might foretell a problem for any issue she might bear constitutes "good cause” to allow her access to any medical reports or related matter contained in the records of her adoption. Medical information of this or any other nature concerning the adoptee should be freely disclosed (see Domestic Relations Law, § 114, with respect to the furnishing of the child’s medical history to the adoptive parents). We, therefore, direct the Surrogate to make available to petitioner, from the file pertaining to her adoption, her medical records and those of her natural parents, as well as any other material therein relating to possible genetic or hereditary conditions, while deleting therefrom any nonpertinent information, including the names of the natural parents. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Latham and Damiani, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Doe v. Ward Law Firm, P.A.
579 S.E.2d 303 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2003)
Schechter v. Boren
535 F. Supp. 1 (W.D. Oklahoma, 1980)
Alma Society Inc. v. Mellon
601 F.2d 1225 (Second Circuit, 1979)
The Alma Society Inc. v. Mellon
601 F.2d 1225 (Second Circuit, 1979)
Alma Society Inc. v. Mellon
459 F. Supp. 912 (S.D. New York, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 A.D.2d 618, 393 N.Y.S.2d 768, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11631, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-chattman-nyappdiv-1977.