Mary D. G. v. Arnesto C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mary D. G. v. Arnesto C.

39 A.D.2d 643, 331 N.Y.S.2d 325, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4862

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

DecidedApril 19, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 A.D.2d 643 (Mary D. G. v. Arnesto C.) 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

Mary D. G. v. Arnesto C., 39 A.D.2d 643, 331 N.Y.S.2d 325, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4862 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: The petition having been dismissed, appellant is entitled to have the evidence considered in its most favorable aspect (see Bodlovich v. Carucci, 38 A D 2d 699) and, since petitioner’s evidence was sufficient, as a matter of law, to establish a prima facie case, it was error to dismiss the petition before the respondent had rested, and a new trial should be had. Whether or not the court upon a retrial will adhere to its original decision after hearing the respondent or any witnesses he may choose to call is a matter for the court as the trier of the fact to determine (Matter of Conway v. Crosby, 272 App. Div. 868). (Appeal from order of Monroe County Family Court dismissing petition in paternity proceeding.) Present — Marsh, J. P., Witmer, Gabrielli, Cardamone and Henry, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: The petition having been dismissed, appellant is entitled to have the evidence considered in its most favorable aspect (see Bodlovich v. Carucci, 38 A D 2d 699) and, since petitioner’s evidence was sufficient, as a matter of law, to establish a prima facie case, it was error to dismiss the petition before the respondent had rested, and a new trial should be had. Whether or not the court upon a retrial will adhere to its original decision after hearing the respondent or any witnesses he may choose to call is a matter for the court as the trier of the fact to determine (Matter of Conway v. Crosby, 272 App. Div. 868). (Appeal from order of Monroe County Family Court dismissing petition in paternity proceeding.) Present — Marsh, J. P., Witmer, Gabrielli, Cardamone and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.2d 643, 331 N.Y.S.2d 325, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4862, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mary-d-g-v-arnesto-c-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack