In re Najaf D.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Najaf D.

84 A.D.3d 1080, 923 N.Y.S.2d 342

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

DecidedMay 17, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 84 A.D.3d 1080 (In re Najaf D.) 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 Najaf D., 84 A.D.3d 1080, 923 N.Y.S.2d 342 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

In related neglect proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, Doreen D., the paternal grandmother of the subject children, appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Elkins, J.), dated February 18, 2010, as granted that branch of the motion of the attorney for the children which was for a forensic examination of her.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Although forensic examinations should not be ordered in every case (see Matter of Pappas v Kells, 77 AD3d 952, 954 [2010]), the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in concluding that the circumstances of this case warrant a forensic examination of the appellant to aid in its determination as to whether custody of the subject children should be awarded to her (see Family Ct Act § 251; Stern v Stern, 225 AD2d 540 [1996]; cf. Matter of Womack v Jackson, 30 AD3d 433 [2006]; Matter of Gonzalez v Gonzalez, 15 AD3d 481, 483-484 [2005]). Rivera, J.E, Skelos, Florio and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

In related neglect proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, Doreen D., the paternal grandmother of the subject children, appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Elkins, J.), dated February 18, 2010, as granted that branch of the motion of the attorney for the children which was for a forensic examination of her.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Although forensic examinations should not be ordered in every case (see Matter of Pappas v Kells, 77 AD3d 952, 954 [2010]), the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in concluding that the circumstances of this case warrant a forensic examination of the appellant to aid in its determination as to whether custody of the subject children should be awarded to her (see Family Ct Act § 251; Stern v Stern, 225 AD2d 540 [1996]; cf. Matter of Womack v Jackson, 30 AD3d 433 [2006]; Matter of Gonzalez v Gonzalez, 15 AD3d 481, 483-484 [2005]). Rivera, J.E, Skelos, Florio and Austin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 A.D.3d 1080, 923 N.Y.S.2d 342, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-najaf-d-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack