Susan A. v. John K.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Susan A. v. John K.

305 A.D.2d 1080, 759 N.Y.S.2d 417, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4843

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

DecidedMay 2, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 305 A.D.2d 1080 (Susan A. v. John K.) 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

Susan A. v. John K., 305 A.D.2d 1080, 759 N.Y.S.2d 417, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4843 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order of Family Court, Erie County (Maxwell, J.), entered January 23, 2002, which dismissed the paternity petition without prejudice.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Respondent appeals from an order dismissing the instant paternity petition without prejudice, contending that the petition should have been dismissed with prejudice. Contrary to respondent’s contention, Family Court is vested with discretion to dismiss a petition without prejudice, even after the close of petitioner’s proof (see CPLR 5013; see also Matter of Stacey O. v Donald P., 137 AD2d 965 [1988]; Roland v Hubbard, 36 AD2d 599 [1971]). Present — Pine, J.P., Wisner, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from an order of Family Court, Erie County (Maxwell, J.), entered January 23, 2002, which dismissed the paternity petition without prejudice.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Respondent appeals from an order dismissing the instant paternity petition without prejudice, contending that the petition should have been dismissed with prejudice. Contrary to respondent’s contention, Family Court is vested with discretion to dismiss a petition without prejudice, even after the close of petitioner’s proof (see CPLR 5013; see also Matter of Stacey O. v Donald P., 137 AD2d 965 [1988]; Roland v Hubbard, 36 AD2d 599 [1971]). Present — Pine, J.P., Wisner, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 A.D.2d 1080, 759 N.Y.S.2d 417, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4843, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/susan-a-v-john-k-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack