In re Kyle Michael M., 281 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001). · Go Syfert
Search
In re Kyle Michael M., 281 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Segool v. Fazio
N.Y. App. Div. · 2018 · confidence medium
We agree with the father that the court erred in authorizing a change to a name other than that requested in the father's petition and in making its determination without holding a hearing ( see generally Matter of Goodyear v New York State Dept. of Health , 163 AD3d 1427 , 1429 [4th Dept 2018]; Matter of Kyle Michael M. , 281 AD2d 954, 954 [4th Dept 2001]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Goodyear v. New York State Dept. of Health
N.Y. App. Div. · 2018 · confidence medium
Here, the court erred in ordering DOH to change the name of the child "without conducting a hearing to determine whether the interests of the infant will be substantially promoted by the change' " ( Matter of Kyle Michael M. , 281 AD2d 954, 954 [4th Dept 2001], quoting § 63; see Matter of Niethe [McCarthy—DePerno] , 151 AD3d 1952, 1953-1954 [4th Dept 2017]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Niethe (McCarthy--DePerno)
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
Because the record is insufficient to enable us to determine *1954 whether the requested change would substantially promote the sons’ interests (see Civil Rights Law § 63; Swank, 216 AD2d at 920 ), we reverse the order and remit the matter to Supreme Court for a hearing on the petition (see Matter of Altheim, 12 AD3d 993, 994 [2004]; Matter of John Phillip M.-P, 307 AD2d 318 , 318-319 [2003]; Matter of Kyle Michael M., 281 AD2d 954, 954-955 [2001]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re Altheim
N.Y. App. Div. · 2004 · confidence medium
Here, the record is insufficient to permit us to determine whether the requested change would substantially promote the child’s interests and, thus, we remit the matter to Supreme Court for a hearing on the petition (see Matter of Kyle Michael M., 281 AD2d 954, 954-955 [2001]).
discussed Cited "see" In re John Phillip M.-P
N.Y. App. Div. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
Accordingly, we remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for a hearing to determine whether the interests of the child would be “substantially promoted” by a name change (Civil Rights Law § 63; see Matter of Kyle Michael M., 281 AD2d 954 [2001]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Kyle Michael M., an Infant. Tammy Lynn A., Appellant Roy S.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Mar 21, 2001.
281 A.D.2d 954
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying the petition of the biological mother and granting the cross petition of the biological father, each seeking to change the name of the parties’ infant son, without conducting a hearing to determine whether “the interests of the infant will be substantially promoted by the change” (Civil Rights Law § 63). The record is insufficient to establish whether either name change requested would substantially promote the[*955] interests of the infant, and thus we reverse the order and remit the matter to Supreme Court for a hearing on the petition and cross petition. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Koshian, J. — Name Change.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Green, Wisner, Kehoe and Burns, JJ.