Maureen K. v. Kingsley P.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Maureen K. v. Kingsley P.

51 A.D.2d 744, 379 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11269

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

DecidedFebruary 9, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 744 (Maureen K. v. Kingsley P.) 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

Maureen K. v. Kingsley P., 51 A.D.2d 744, 379 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11269 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In a paternity proceeding, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated February 14, 1972, which adjudged appellant the father of the child. Order reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, and petition dismissed. Paternity was not established by evidence which was clear, convincing or entirely satisfactory. Petitioner admitted that she was uncertain of the identity of the father of the child until after the child was born. Latham, Acting P. J., Margett, Christ, Shapiro and Titone, JJ., concur.

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

In a paternity proceeding, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated February 14, 1972, which adjudged appellant the father of the child. Order reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, and petition dismissed. Paternity was not established by evidence which was clear, convincing or entirely satisfactory. Petitioner admitted that she was uncertain of the identity of the father of the child until after the child was born. Latham, Acting P. J., Margett, Christ, Shapiro and Titone, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 744, 379 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maureen-k-v-kingsley-p-nyappdiv-1976.