People ex rel. Fairley v. "John Doe"

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Fairley v. "John Doe"

27 A.D.2d 808, 280 N.Y.S.2d 527, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4714

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

DecidedMarch 7, 1967

StatusPublished

This text of 27 A.D.2d 808 (People ex rel. Fairley v. "John Doe") 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

People ex rel. Fairley v. "John Doe", 27 A.D.2d 808, 280 N.Y.S.2d 527, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4714 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment sustaining a writ of habeas corpus obtained by petitioner-mother and decreeing that the custody of the infant be awarded to said petitioner and her husband, unanimously reversed on the law and on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements, and matter remanded to Special Term, Mr. Justice Quinn presiding, for further hearing, in accordance with the suggestions herein. There should be further exploration of petitioner’s claim of duress, which, she alleges, compelled her execution of the contract of surrender. Persons having knowledge of the circumstances leading to, and surrounding, the execution of the surrender agreement should be called to testify at the further hearing, including the notary public before whom the petitioner executed the document in question and all representatives of the Department of Welfare and Spence Chapin Adoption Service having knowledge of any relevant facts relating to the surrender agreement. While, under the circumstances, there should be finally resolved whether the contract of surrender was executed as a result of duress, it appears from this record that, presently, the petitioner and her husband are totally unfit to have custody of the child. Concur — Botein, P. J., Eager, Capozzoli, Tilzer and McNally, JJ.

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

Order and judgment sustaining a writ of habeas corpus obtained by petitioner-mother and decreeing that the custody of the infant be awarded to said petitioner and her husband, unanimously reversed on the law and on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements, and matter remanded to Special Term, Mr. Justice Quinn presiding, for further hearing, in accordance with the suggestions herein. There should be further exploration of petitioner’s claim of duress, which, she alleges, compelled her execution of the contract of surrender. Persons having knowledge of the circumstances leading to, and surrounding, the execution of the surrender agreement should be called to testify at the further hearing, including the notary public before whom the petitioner executed the document in question and all representatives of the Department of Welfare and Spence Chapin Adoption Service having knowledge of any relevant facts relating to the surrender agreement. While, under the circumstances, there should be finally resolved whether the contract of surrender was executed as a result of duress, it appears from this record that, presently, the petitioner and her husband are totally unfit to have custody of the child. Concur — Botein, P. J., Eager, Capozzoli, Tilzer and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 A.D.2d 808, 280 N.Y.S.2d 527, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4714, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-fairley-v-john-doe-nyappdiv-1967.