Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
20 New York opinions name it 6 courts 1969–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Matter of Ciara FF. (Robert FF.)green2 sentences2025Further, the foster care agency was under no obligation to reach out to the father ( see Matter of Ciara FF. [Robert FF.] ,235 AD3d at 1164; Matter of Tiyani AA. [Yani Z.] ,232 AD3d 1147, 1150 [3d Dept 2024]; Matter of Lamar LL. [Loreal MM.] ,86 AD3d 680, 681 [3d Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 712 [2011]), and the record reflects that the father was given contact information for both petitioner and the foster care agency. 2025Further, the foster care agency was under no obligation to reach out to the father ( see Matter of Ciara FF. [Robert FF.] ,235 AD3d at 1164; Matter of Tiyani AA. [Yani Z.] , 232 AD3d 1147 , 1150 [3d Dept 2024]; Matter of Lamar LL. [Loreal MM.] , 86 AD3d 680, 681 [3d Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 712 [2011]), and the record reflects that the father was given contact information for both petitioner and the foster care agency. | 1 | 1 |
Matter of Darrell J. D. J. (Kenneth R.)green2 sentences2025Even if the father erroneously believed that a paternity test was required to visit the child, it is telling that he made no efforts to facilitate that test ( see Matter of Dennym K.J. [Ronnie O.] ,215 AD3d 1254, 1255-1256 [4th Dept 2023]; compare Matter of Darrell J.D.J. [Kenneth R.] ,156 AD3d 788, 789-790 [2d Dept 2017]). 2025Even if the father erroneously believed that a paternity test was required to visit the child, it is telling that he made no efforts to facilitate that test ( see Matter of Dennym K.J. [Ronnie O.] , 215 AD3d 1254, 1255-1256 [4th Dept 2023]; compare Matter of Darrell J.D.J. [Kenneth R.] , 156 AD3d 788 , 789-790 [2d Dept 2017]). | 1 | 1 |
In re Lamar LL.green2 sentences2025Further, the foster care agency was under no obligation to reach out to the father ( see Matter of Ciara FF. [Robert FF.] ,235 AD3d at 1164; Matter of Tiyani AA. [Yani Z.] ,232 AD3d 1147, 1150 [3d Dept 2024]; Matter of Lamar LL. [Loreal MM.] ,86 AD3d 680, 681 [3d Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 712 [2011]), and the record reflects that the father was given contact information for both petitioner and the foster care agency. 2025Further, the foster care agency was under no obligation to reach out to the father ( see Matter of Ciara FF. [Robert FF.] ,235 AD3d at 1164; Matter of Tiyani AA. [Yani Z.] , 232 AD3d 1147 , 1150 [3d Dept 2024]; Matter of Lamar LL. [Loreal MM.] , 86 AD3d 680, 681 [3d Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 712 [2011]), and the record reflects that the father was given contact information for both petitioner and the foster care agency. | 1 | 1 |
Matter of Dennym K.J. (Ronnie O.)green2 sentences2025Even if the father erroneously believed that a paternity test was required to visit the child, it is telling that he made no efforts to facilitate that test ( see Matter of Dennym K.J. [Ronnie O.] ,215 AD3d 1254, 1255-1256 [4th Dept 2023]; compare Matter of Darrell J.D.J. [Kenneth R.] ,156 AD3d 788, 789-790 [2d Dept 2017]). 2025Even if the father erroneously believed that a paternity test was required to visit the child, it is telling that he made no efforts to facilitate that test ( see Matter of Dennym K.J. [Ronnie O.] , 215 AD3d 1254, 1255-1256 [4th Dept 2023]; compare Matter of Darrell J.D.J. [Kenneth R.] , 156 AD3d 788 , 789-790 [2d Dept 2017]). | 1 | 1 |
Matter of Mario WW. v. Kristin XX.green2 sentences2025The burden then shifted to respondent to establish that ordering the paternity test would not be in the child's best interests ( see Matter of Mario WW. v Kristin XX ., 173 AD3d 1392 , 1394 [3d Dept 2019], lv denied 40 NY3d 901 [2023]), which she failed to do. 2025The burden then shifted to respondent to establish that ordering the paternity test would not be in the child's best interests ( see Matter of Mario WW. v Kristin XX ., 173 AD3d 1392, 1394 [3d Dept 2019], lv denied 40 NY3d 901 [2023]), which she failed to do. | 1 | 1 |
Matter of Tiyani AA. (Yani Z.)green2 sentences2025Further, the foster care agency was under no obligation to reach out to the father ( see Matter of Ciara FF. [Robert FF.] ,235 AD3d at 1164; Matter of Tiyani AA. [Yani Z.] ,232 AD3d 1147, 1150 [3d Dept 2024]; Matter of Lamar LL. [Loreal MM.] ,86 AD3d 680, 681 [3d Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 712 [2011]), and the record reflects that the father was given contact information for both petitioner and the foster care agency. 2025Further, the foster care agency was under no obligation to reach out to the father ( see Matter of Ciara FF. [Robert FF.] ,235 AD3d at 1164; Matter of Tiyani AA. [Yani Z.] , 232 AD3d 1147 , 1150 [3d Dept 2024]; Matter of Lamar LL. [Loreal MM.] , 86 AD3d 680, 681 [3d Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 712 [2011]), and the record reflects that the father was given contact information for both petitioner and the foster care agency. | 1 | 1 |
Kelley C. v. Kim M.green1 sentence2018Under these circumstances, the order of filiation is considered final ( see Matter of Kelley C. v Kim M. , 278 AD2d 893, 893 [4th Dept 2000]). | 1 | 1 |
Matter Hm v. Etgreen1 sentence2018The appeal of Judge Rosado's order does not implicate whether the AFC competently or zealously represented G.'s interests at the inquest hearing, but whether the Family Court Judge was correct in finding there was no legal basis for the SM's determination ( see Matter of H.M. v E.T. , 14 NY3d 521, 525-526 [2010]). | 1 | 1 |
Caliguri v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.green1 sentence2016Here, the 2008 determination that petitioner lacked standing did not bar the instant proceeding because it did not decide the merits of petitioner’s paternity claim {see id. at 13-14 ; Ricatto v Mapliedi, 133 AD3d 737, 739 [2015]; Caliguri v JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 121 AD3d 1030, 1031 [2014], lv denied 25 NY3d 911 [2015]; Jackson v Jamaica Hosp. | 1 | 1 |
Ricatto v. Mapliedigreen1 sentence2016Here, the 2008 determination that petitioner lacked standing did not bar the instant proceeding because it did not decide the merits of petitioner’s paternity claim {see id. at 13-14 ; Ricatto v Mapliedi, 133 AD3d 737, 739 [2015]; Caliguri v JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 121 AD3d 1030, 1031 [2014], lv denied 25 NY3d 911 [2015]; Jackson v Jamaica Hosp. | 1 | 1 |
Derrick H. v. Martha J.green1 sentence2012To now, at this stage in her life, order a DNA test and let her know that respondent questions his bond with her would be detrimental to her and would cause her to suffer irreparable loss of status (compare Matter of Derrick H. v Martha J., 82 AD3d 1236, 1239 [2011]). * In the eight years since the child’s birth, respondent has not sought a paternity test, despite his claims that he raised the is sue with the mother on various occasions. | 1 | 1 |
Mobley v. Ishmaelgreen1 sentence2010While a hearing is often necessary to determine a child’s best interests, under these circumstances, where petitioner failed to tender any evidence that it would be of any benefit to the child if his petition for a paternity test were granted at this late juncture, Family Court properly dismissed the petition without a hearing “as it possessed sufficient information to render an informed decision consistent with the child’s best interests” (Matter of Razo v Leyva, 3 AD3d at 571 ; see Matter of Mobley v Ishmael, 285 AD2d at 648-649 ). | 1 | 1 |
John Robert P. v. Vito C.green1 sentence2008“The paramount concern in applying equitable estoppel in [paternity] cases has been, and continues to be, the best interests of the child” (Jean Maby H. v Joseph H., 246 AD2d 282, 285 [1998]; see Matter of John Robert P. v Vito C., 23 AD3d 659, 661 [2005]). | 1 | 1 |
Maby H. v. Joseph H.green1 sentence2008“The paramount concern in applying equitable estoppel in [paternity] cases has been, and continues to be, the best interests of the child” (Jean Maby H. v Joseph H., 246 AD2d 282, 285 [1998]; see Matter of John Robert P. v Vito C., 23 AD3d 659, 661 [2005]). | 1 | 1 |
| Boyles v. Boylesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Caban v. Mohammedgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
MTR. OF SHONDEL J. v. Mark D.
green
2 sentences2025Indeed, the parties' "motivation and honesty are irrelevant" ( Shondel J. , 7 NY3d at 331 ) because the determination whether equitable estoppel should be applied "depends entirely on the best interests of the child and not the equities between the adults" ( Jennifer L. , 145 AD3d at 1582 ). 2012Respondent had a choice to make; he could “either put the doubts aside and initiate a parental relationship with the child, or insist on a scientific test of paternity before initiating a parental relationship” (Shondel, 7 NY3d at 331 ). | 2 | 2012–2025 |
David L. v. Cindy Pearl L.
green
2 sentences2004Thus, in David L. v Cindy Pearl L. ( 208 AD2d 502 [2d Dept 1994]), due to the presumption of legitimacy, combined with equitable estoppel in a “best interests” analysis, a paternity test was not allowed in a case where a child was four years old and had an established relationship with the husband. 2004Thus, in David L. v Cindy Pearl L. ( 208 AD2d 502 [2d Dept 1994]), due to the presumption of legitimacy, combined with equitable estoppel in a "best interests" analysis, a paternity test was not allowed in a case where a child was four years old and had an established relationship with the husband. | 2 | 2004–2004 |
L., JENNIFER v. S., GERALD
green
1 sentence2025Indeed, the parties' "motivation and honesty are irrelevant" ( Shondel J. , 7 NY3d at 331 ) because the determination whether equitable estoppel should be applied "depends entirely on the best interests of the child and not the equities between the adults" ( Jennifer L. , 145 AD3d at 1582 ). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Tanesha H. v. Phillip C.
neutral
1 sentence2018These critical legal principles and distinctions bear on whether petitioner met his burden of proof at the paternity hearing by presenting clear and convincing evidence ( Matter of Tanesha H. v Phillip C. , 57 AD3d 403 [1st Dept. 2008]). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Landau, P.C. v. LaRossa, Mitchell & Ross
green
1 sentence2016Here, the 2008 determination that petitioner lacked standing did not bar the instant proceeding because it did not decide the merits of petitioner’s paternity claim {see id. at 13-14 ; Ricatto v Mapliedi, 133 AD3d 737, 739 [2015]; Caliguri v JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 121 AD3d 1030, 1031 [2014], lv denied 25 NY3d 911 [2015]; Jackson v Jamaica Hosp. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Commissioner of Social Services v. Remy K.Y.
green
1 sentence2015Contrary to respondent’s contention, Family Court Act § 262 (a) does not provide for the right to assigned counsel on issues of support, and there is no constitutional right to assigned counsel in a support proceeding (Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. of City of N.Y. v Remy K.Y., 298 AD2d 261 , 262 [1st Dept 2002]). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Razo v. Leyva
green
1 sentence2010While a hearing is often necessary to determine a child’s best interests, under these circumstances, where petitioner failed to tender any evidence that it would be of any benefit to the child if his petition for a paternity test were granted at this late juncture, Family Court properly dismissed the petition without a hearing “as it possessed sufficient information to render an informed decision consistent with the child’s best interests” (Matter of Razo v Leyva, 3 AD3d at 571 ; see Matter of Mobley v Ishmael, 285 AD2d at 648-649 ). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
In re Unique Jaleel S.
green
1 sentence2007A preponderance of the evidence shows that the children are in a stable and caring preadoptive home, have bonded with their foster mother and the other children in the home, and have expressed no desire to see their father, and that termination of respondent’s parental rights is in their best interests (see Unique Jaleel S., 35 AD3d at 250 ). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Gray v. Rose
green
1 sentence2004It is well established that where there is no court decree of legal separation or divorce, access must be clearly and convincingly negated. ( See, Matter of Margaret A. v Nicholas M. , 39 AD2d 706 [2d Dept 1972]; Gray v Rose , 32 AD2d 994 [3d Dept 1969]; Matter of Donahue v American Radiator & Std. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Margaret A. v. Nicholas M.
neutral
1 sentence2004It is well established that where there is no court decree of legal separation or divorce, access must be clearly and convincingly negated. ( See, Matter of Margaret A. v Nicholas M. , 39 AD2d 706 [2d Dept 1972]; Gray v Rose , 32 AD2d 994 [3d Dept 1969]; Matter of Donahue v American Radiator & Std. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Fung v. Fung
green
1 sentence2004(See, Fung v Fung, 238 AD2d 375 [2d Dept 1997].) In practice, this means that the presumption’s implementation has sometimes stood in the way of such evidence (e.g., a paternity test) being obtained. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Yetman v. St. Charles Hospital
green
1 sentence1993Charles Hosp., 112 AD2d 297 ). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Constance S. v. Steven A.
neutral
1 sentence1992It was not until September 1990, after a petition was filed against him seeking confinement costs, that respondent first raised the issue of his paternity and it was not until February 1991 that he made the instant motion to vacate (see, Matter of Constance S. v Steven A., 130 AD2d 493 ). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Montelone v. Antia
green
1 sentence1989Recent case law indicates that in these circumstances, respondent should be precluded from asserting this paternity claim (see, Matter of Montelone v Antia, 60 AD2d 603 ; see also, Matter of Boyles v Boyles, 95 AD2d 95 ; Matter of Sharon GG. v Duane HH., 95 AD2d 466 , affd 63 NY2d 859 ; State of New York ex rel. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| State ex rel. H. v. P. green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Sharon GG. v. Duane HH.
green
1 sentence1989Recent case law indicates that in these circumstances, respondent should be precluded from asserting this paternity claim (see, Matter of Montelone v Antia, 60 AD2d 603 ; see also, Matter of Boyles v Boyles, 95 AD2d 95 ; Matter of Sharon GG. v Duane HH., 95 AD2d 466 , affd 63 NY2d 859 ; State of New York ex rel. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Sharon GG. v. Duane HH.
green
1 sentence1989Recent case law indicates that in these circumstances, respondent should be precluded from asserting this paternity claim (see, Matter of Montelone v Antia, 60 AD2d 603 ; see also, Matter of Boyles v Boyles, 95 AD2d 95 ; Matter of Sharon GG. v Duane HH., 95 AD2d 466 , affd 63 NY2d 859 ; State of New York ex rel. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Riggs v. . Palmer green | 1 | 1986–1986 |
| D'Elia v. Philip C. neutral | 1 | 1983–1983 |
| Hoenig v. Westphal green | 1 | 1983–1983 |
| In re Female F. D. neutral | 1 | 1980–1980 |
| Elizabeth E. v. Leary green | 1 | 1976–1976 |
| Schmidt v. Merchants Despatch Transportation Co. green | 1 | 1969–1969 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.