Katherine D. G. v. Harold S.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Katherine D. G. v. Harold S.

39 A.D.2d 746, 332 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4613

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

DecidedMay 15, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 A.D.2d 746 (Katherine D. G. v. Harold 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

Katherine D. G. v. Harold S., 39 A.D.2d 746, 332 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4613 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

In a paternity proceeding, the appeal, by permission of this court, is from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated December 15, 1970, which denied his motion to examine petitioner before trial. Order reversed, without costs, and motion granted. The examination shall proceed at a time and place to be fixed in a written notice of not less than 10 days, to be given by appellant to petitioner, or at such time and place as the parties may agree. This proceeding was commenced on or about March 3, 1970, upon a petition alleging that appellant is the father of a child born to petitioner on March 22, 1965 and that appellant had acknowledged paternity by furnishing support. Petitioner refused to appear for a pretrial examination pursuant to appellant’s notice; and the motion under review followed. In our opinion, the special circumstances of this ease require that appellant be permitted to examine petitioner so that he can adequately prepare and defend this proceeding. Rabin, P. J., Shapiro, Gulotta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In a paternity proceeding, the appeal, by permission of this court, is from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated December 15, 1970, which denied his motion to examine petitioner before trial. Order reversed, without costs, and motion granted. The examination shall proceed at a time and place to be fixed in a written notice of not less than 10 days, to be given by appellant to petitioner, or at such time and place as the parties may agree. This proceeding was commenced on or about March 3, 1970, upon a petition alleging that appellant is the father of a child born to petitioner on March 22, 1965 and that appellant had acknowledged paternity by furnishing support. Petitioner refused to appear for a pretrial examination pursuant to appellant’s notice; and the motion under review followed. In our opinion, the special circumstances of this ease require that appellant be permitted to examine petitioner so that he can adequately prepare and defend this proceeding. Rabin, P. J., Shapiro, Gulotta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.2d 746, 332 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4613, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/katherine-d-g-v-harold-s-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack