On March 16 the Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department, in the Matter of Lisa C. v Steven T., affirmed an order of Kings County Family Court that, after a hearing, determined that Steven T. was the "father of the subject child."
The appellant, Steven T., denied that he was the father and wanted DNA testing done, but the Supreme Court said, "Contrary to the appellant's contention, the Family Court was presented with sufficient evidence at the hearing and at an in camera interview with the child to make the determination that it was in the best interests of the child to equitably estop the appellant from denying paternity and seeking DNA genetic marker testing (see Matter of Juan A. v Rosemarie N., 55 AD3d 827; Matter of Jose F.R. v Reina C.A., 46 AD3d 564)."
This is the second time in the past four weeks that a New York State appellate court has stated that "the best interests of the child" trump a father's right to determine paternity via DNA tests. In the Matter of Lisa C. v Steven T. the father denied his paternity. However, in the earlier case we reported on, the father wanted DNA testing to prove that he was the child's father.
For more information: Read the entire ruling
Comments
Of course it's in the best interested of the child for the mother to not be accountable.
Ridiculous.
Dan, there was a recent decision noted in the NY Slip Decisions that is terrifying. Without anything more than credible evidence, a party was sent to prison.
Please see People v Texidor 03/04/2010 App Div, 3d Dept.
Granted, the slip decision does not tell the whole story but from this slip decision, it appears that a gentleman was convicted of sexual assault against a minor owing to "credible" evidence only.
No physical evidence, no collaberating witnesses. It appears, in my humble opinion, that he self-incriminated himself owing to a local CPS interview.
Nothing more than that -except for the teen's accusations, seem to be the basis for his imprisonment.
This is terrifying. Please research this case and if you chose to, please report on same.
Many thanks-
On this same subject, I learned a new word a couple days ago in this story-
Tennessee Taking the Lead in Family Law Reform
by Welmer on March 16, 2010
The Spearhead
www.the-spearhead.com/2010/03/16/tennessee-taking-the-lead-in-family-law-reform/
cuckold [kuhk-uhld] –noun
1. the husband of an unfaithful wife.
–verb (used with object)
2. to make a cuckold of (a husband).
Origin:
1200–50; ME cukeweld, later cok(k)ewold, cukwold < AF *cucuald (cf. MF cucuault), equiv. to OF cocu cuckoo + -ald, -alt pejorative suffix (see ribald); appar. orig. applied to an adulterer, in allusion to the cuckoo's habit of laying its eggs in other birds' nests
Leonard Henderson, co-founder
American Family Rights Association
www.familyrights.us
"Until Every Child Comes Home" ©
"The Voice of America's Families" ©
Maggie, I am not sure that I have enough knowledge or am competent enough to comment on People v Texidor. Here is a link to the case if anyone is interested www.leagle.com/unsecure/page.htm?shortname=innyco20100304258 I will try to find out more and write about it if I feel that I am able to.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!