In re Nelson R.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Nelson R.

51 A.D.2d 727, 379 N.Y.S.2d 135, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11211

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

DecidedFebruary 2, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 727 (In re Nelson R.) 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 Nelson R., 51 A.D.2d 727, 379 N.Y.S.2d 135, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11211 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In a juveniledelinquency proceeding, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated July 2, 1975, which, after a fact-finding hearing, adjudicated appellant to be a juvenile delinquent and placed him with the Division for Youth for 18 months. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, and proceeding remanded to the Family Court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. When, upon the convening of court on March 5, 1975, the complaint report previously demanded by the Law Guardian had not been produced, we think that, under the circumstances of this case, his request for an adjournment for the purpose of procuring such report should have been granted. It constituted an abuse of the Family Court’s discretion to require that the fact-finding hearing take place at a [728]*728time when the Law Guardian was not prepared to present a proper defense for his client. It should be noted that there is a concession by the corporation counsel that there should be a new hearing. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Damiani, Christ and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a juveniledelinquency proceeding, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated July 2, 1975, which, after a fact-finding hearing, adjudicated appellant to be a juvenile delinquent and placed him with the Division for Youth for 18 months. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, and proceeding remanded to the Family Court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. When, upon the convening of court on March 5, 1975, the complaint report previously demanded by the Law Guardian had not been produced, we think that, under the circumstances of this case, his request for an adjournment for the purpose of procuring such report should have been granted. It constituted an abuse of the Family Court’s discretion to require that the fact-finding hearing take place at a [728]*728time when the Law Guardian was not prepared to present a proper defense for his client. It should be noted that there is a concession by the corporation counsel that there should be a new hearing. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Damiani, Christ and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 727, 379 N.Y.S.2d 135, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-nelson-r-nyappdiv-1976.