Sharon K. v. Mark C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sharon K. v. Mark C.

199 A.D.2d 981, 608 N.Y.S.2d 923, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12571

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

DecidedDecember 29, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 199 A.D.2d 981 (Sharon K. v. Mark 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

Sharon K. v. Mark C., 199 A.D.2d 981, 608 N.Y.S.2d 923, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12571 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Case held, decision reserved and matter remitted to Erie County Family Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: In this paternity proceeding, the Judicial Hearing Officer failed to set forth the basis for his finding that petitioner did not meet her burden to prove respondent’s paternity by clear and convincing evidence. Petitioner was physically separated, but not divorced, from her husband when the child was conceived. The evidence bearing on lack of access by petitioner’s husband and the sharp conflict in the evidence submitted by petitioner and respondent presented questions of credibility for the trier of fact. Where questions of credibility are at issue, findings of fact are essential for meaningful appellate review (Matter of Joan S. v Ronald B., 71 AD2d 606). We, therefore, remit the matter to Family Court to make findings of fact. (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Trost, J.H.O.—Paternity.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Law-ton, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

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

Case held, decision reserved and matter remitted to Erie County Family Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: In this paternity proceeding, the Judicial Hearing Officer failed to set forth the basis for his finding that petitioner did not meet her burden to prove respondent’s paternity by clear and convincing evidence. Petitioner was physically separated, but not divorced, from her husband when the child was conceived. The evidence bearing on lack of access by petitioner’s husband and the sharp conflict in the evidence submitted by petitioner and respondent presented questions of credibility for the trier of fact. Where questions of credibility are at issue, findings of fact are essential for meaningful appellate review (Matter of Joan S. v Ronald B., 71 AD2d 606). We, therefore, remit the matter to Family Court to make findings of fact. (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Trost, J.H.O.—Paternity.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Law-ton, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 A.D.2d 981, 608 N.Y.S.2d 923, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12571, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sharon-k-v-mark-c-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack