Kathy G. J. v. Arnold D.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kathy G. J. v. Arnold D.

80 A.D.2d 896

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

DecidedMarch 16, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 80 A.D.2d 896 (Kathy G. J. v. Arnold 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

Kathy G. J. v. Arnold D., 80 A.D.2d 896 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

In a paternity proceeding, the appeal (by permission) is from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated May 21, 1980, which, after a hearing, adjudged appellant to be the father of the petitioner’s child, directed payment of temporary support, including a lump-sum payment of $5,000, and set the matter down for a hearing on support. Order affirmed, with costs. The record supports the determination of the trial court that petitioner established by clear, convincing and entirely satisfactory evidence that appellant is the father of her child. The numerous contentions that appellant raises which assert, inter alia, that petitioner’s testimony was incredible, that another person, not appellant, was clearly proven to be the father of the child, and that the trial court misinterpreted the testimony and committed errors in the admission of certain evidence (e.g., a baptismal certificate), are without merit. Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Mangano and O’Connor, 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) is from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated May 21, 1980, which, after a hearing, adjudged appellant to be the father of the petitioner’s child, directed payment of temporary support, including a lump-sum payment of $5,000, and set the matter down for a hearing on support. Order affirmed, with costs. The record supports the determination of the trial court that petitioner established by clear, convincing and entirely satisfactory evidence that appellant is the father of her child. The numerous contentions that appellant raises which assert, inter alia, that petitioner’s testimony was incredible, that another person, not appellant, was clearly proven to be the father of the child, and that the trial court misinterpreted the testimony and committed errors in the admission of certain evidence (e.g., a baptismal certificate), are without merit. Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Mangano and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.2d 896, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kathy-g-j-v-arnold-d-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack