People ex rel. Miller v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Miller v. Miller

95 A.D.2d 867, 464 N.Y.S.2d 380, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18822

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

DecidedJune 27, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 95 A.D.2d 867 (People ex rel. Miller v. Miller) 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. Miller v. Miller, 95 A.D.2d 867, 464 N.Y.S.2d 380, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18822 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a habeas corpus proceeding, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Deeley, J.), dated November 24, 1982, which, inter alia, set certain visitation rights for the petitioner with the child of the parties. Judgment reversed, without costs or disbursements, and matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith. Pending determination of the matter, the visitation directed in the judgment appealed from shall continue. We note that an independent psychiatric evaluation has not been made of the petitioner and of the child. Under the facts of this case, and in light of the foregoing, we remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for the appointment of an independent psychiatrist or psychiatrists to conduct such evaluations of the father and son and to report to that court. Thereafter, the court shall conduct further proceedings and make its determination based upon the psychiatric reports and all the facts and circumstances of this case. Gibbons, J. P., Thompson, Gulotta and Boyers, JJ., concur.

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

— In a habeas corpus proceeding, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Deeley, J.), dated November 24, 1982, which, inter alia, set certain visitation rights for the petitioner with the child of the parties. Judgment reversed, without costs or disbursements, and matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith. Pending determination of the matter, the visitation directed in the judgment appealed from shall continue. We note that an independent psychiatric evaluation has not been made of the petitioner and of the child. Under the facts of this case, and in light of the foregoing, we remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for the appointment of an independent psychiatrist or psychiatrists to conduct such evaluations of the father and son and to report to that court. Thereafter, the court shall conduct further proceedings and make its determination based upon the psychiatric reports and all the facts and circumstances of this case. Gibbons, J. P., Thompson, Gulotta and Boyers, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

95 A.D.2d 867, 464 N.Y.S.2d 380, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18822, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-miller-v-miller-nyappdiv-1983.