In re Christiana R.H.
This text of 90 A.D.3d 926 (In re Christiana R.H.) 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.
Opinion
[927]*927The appellant’s right to a speedy fact-finding hearing (see Family Ct Act § 340.1 [2]) was not violated. The record indicates that the appellant’s counsel waived the appellant’s right to challenge the adjournment of the fact-finding hearing from February 4, 2010, to March 9, 2010, because counsel consented to that adjournment. Moreover, “special circumstances” existed warranting the successive adjournments from March 9, 2010, to March 10, 2010, and then to March 23, 2010, based on the absence of the co-respondent’s counsel due to illness (see Matter of Andre C., 249 AD2d 386 [1998]), and the “the Family Court Act . . . preference for a single fact-finding hearing in cases involving multiple respondents” (Matter of Davonte B., 44 AD3d 763, 764 [2007]; see Family Ct Act § 311.3 [1]). Mastro, A.EJ., Hall, Sgroi and Cohen, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
90 A.D.3d 926, 935 N.Y.2d 612, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-christiana-rh-nyappdiv-2011.