Vernia P. v. William H.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vernia P. v. William H.

226 A.D.2d 539, 641 N.Y.S.2d 88, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4343

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

DecidedApril 15, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 226 A.D.2d 539 (Vernia P. v. William H.) 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

Vernia P. v. William H., 226 A.D.2d 539, 641 N.Y.S.2d 88, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4343 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 5 to establish paternity, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Amodeo, J.), dated September 12,1994, which, after a hearing, found that she failed to establish that the respondent was the father of the subject child and denied the petition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The results of the HLA blood test excluded the respondent as the father of the child, and the Family Court gave those results the weight it deemed appropriate (see, Matter of Department of Social Servs. [Sandra C.] v Thomas J. S., 100 AD2d 119, 124-125). Accordingly, the Family Court properly concluded that the petitioner failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent was the father of the subject child (see, Matter of Jane PP. v Paul QQ., 65 NY2d 994, 996). Sullivan, J. P., Copertino, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 5 to establish paternity, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Amodeo, J.), dated September 12,1994, which, after a hearing, found that she failed to establish that the respondent was the father of the subject child and denied the petition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The results of the HLA blood test excluded the respondent as the father of the child, and the Family Court gave those results the weight it deemed appropriate (see, Matter of Department of Social Servs. [Sandra C.] v Thomas J. S., 100 AD2d 119, 124-125). Accordingly, the Family Court properly concluded that the petitioner failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent was the father of the subject child (see, Matter of Jane PP. v Paul QQ., 65 NY2d 994, 996). Sullivan, J. P., Copertino, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

226 A.D.2d 539, 641 N.Y.S.2d 88, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vernia-p-v-william-h-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack