petition without an evidentiary hearing in New York

2012The father appeals, and we now reverse. * As Family Court acknowledged during the parties’ appearance before it, the father — a respondent in a custody proceeding — has the right to counsel, the right to seek an adjournment to confer with counsel, and the right to assigned counsel if qualified financially (see Family Ct Act § 262 [a] [iii]; Matter of Wilson v Bennett, 282 AD2d 933, 934 [2001]).

2012The father appeals, and we now reverse. * As Family Court acknowledged during the parties’ appearance before it, the father — a respondent in a custody proceeding — has the right to counsel, the right to seek an adjournment to confer with counsel, and the right to assigned counsel if qualified financially (see Family Ct Act § 262 [a] [iii]; Matter of Wilson v Bennett, 282 AD2d 933, 934 [2001]).

2016Enforcement of a postadoption contact agreement, however, “will only be ordered if it is determined to be in the child’s best interests” (Matter of Andie B. [Lee J.—Hope C.], 102 AD3d at 129; see Domestic Relations Law § 112-b [4]; Matter of Mya V.P. [Amber R.—Laura P.], 79 AD3d 1794, 1796 [2010]), and “[a]n evidentiary hearing is generally necessary to determine what is in the best interests of the child” (Matter of Heidi E. [Tresea F.—Phyllis G.], 68 AD3d 1174, 1174-1175 [2009]).

2016Enforcement of a postadoption contact agreement, however, “will only be ordered if it is determined to be in the child’s best interests” (Matter of Andie B. [Lee J.—Hope C.], 102 AD3d at 129; see Domestic Relations Law § 112-b [4]; Matter of Mya V.P. [Amber R.—Laura P.], 79 AD3d 1794, 1796 [2010]), and “[a]n evidentiary hearing is generally necessary to determine what is in the best interests of the child” (Matter of Heidi E. [Tresea F.—Phyllis G.], 68 AD3d 1174, 1174-1175 [2009]).

2016As respondent concedes, Family Court erred in dismissing *1292 the petition without an evidentiary hearing. 2 Pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 112-b (4), birth parents and adoptive parents may enter into a legally enforceable agreement regarding postadoption contact that may thereafter be enforced by filing a petition in Family Court (see Matter of Andie B. [Lee J.—Hope C.], 102 AD3d 128 , 129 [2012]).

2016Enforcement of a postadoption contact agreement, however, “will only be ordered if it is determined to be in the child’s best interests” (Matter of Andie B. [Lee J.—Hope C.], 102 AD3d at 129; see Domestic Relations Law § 112-b [4]; Matter of Mya V.P. [Amber R.—Laura P.], 79 AD3d 1794, 1796 [2010]), and “[a]n evidentiary hearing is generally necessary to determine what is in the best interests of the child” (Matter of Heidi E. [Tresea F.—Phyllis G.], 68 AD3d 1174, 1174-1175 [2009]).

2015Given the circumstances, Family Court did not err in dismissing the petition without an evidentiary hearing (see Matter of Marquis v Washington, 86 AD3d 753, 754 [2011]; Matter of Heater v Heater, 81 AD3d 1017, 1017 [2011]).

2015Given the circumstances, Family Court did not err in dismissing the petition without an evidentiary hearing (see Matter of Marquis v Washington, 86 AD3d 753, 754 [2011]; Matter of Heater v Heater, 81 AD3d 1017, 1017 [2011]).

1997While it is not necessary for Surrogate’s Court to conduct a hearing in cases where facts are undisputed, “[w]here * * * the respondent interposes an answer which denies a material fact contained in the petition and no motion is made to dismiss [for failure to state a cause of action], the Surrogate must conduct a hearing” (2 Cox-Arenson-Medina, NY Civ Prac, SCPA 713.02, at 7-209; see, Matter of Burns, 1 AD2d 505, 507 ; Matter of McDonald, 160 App Div 86, 87 , affd 211 NY 272 ; see also, Matter of Thieriot, 188 NY 589 ).

1997While it is not necessary for Surrogate’s Court to conduct a hearing in cases where facts are undisputed, “[w]here * * * the respondent interposes an answer which denies a material fact contained in the petition and no motion is made to dismiss [for failure to state a cause of action], the Surrogate must conduct a hearing” (2 Cox-Arenson-Medina, NY Civ Prac, SCPA 713.02, at 7-209; see, Matter of Burns, 1 AD2d 505, 507 ; Matter of McDonald, 160 App Div 86, 87 , affd 211 NY 272 ; see also, Matter of Thieriot, 188 NY 589 ).