Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: DAVID A.A., Petitioner-Respondent, v. MARYANN A., Respondent-Appellant.
Family Court erred in granting petitioner's motion for a default order awarding sole legal custody of the parties' child to petitioner. Respondent's failure to appear at the hearing on the petition does not automatically constitute a default (see Matter of Shemeco D., 265 A.D.2d 860, 695 N.Y.S.2d 799; Matter of Kwasi S., 221 A.D.2d 1029, 634 N.Y.S.2d 579), particularly “where, as here, respondent[ ] did appear by [her] assigned counsel who objected to petitioner's default motion and who, given the opportunity, could have proceeded to a hearing and defended [her] absent client [ ]” (Matter of Cassandra M., 260 A.D.2d 961, 963, 689 N.Y.S.2d 279). Moreover, “[u]nless there is sufficient evidence before the court to enable it to undertake a comprehensive independent review of the child[ ]'s best interests ․, a determination of a custody matter should only be made after a full evidentiary hearing” (Miller-Glass v. Glass, 237 A.D.2d 723, 724, 653 N.Y.S.2d 982). The record does not contain sufficient evidence supporting the award of sole legal custody to petitioner. We therefore reverse the order, deny petitioner's motion and remit the matter to Family Court for a hearing on the petition.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, petitioner's motion is denied and the matter is remitted to Family Court, Livingston County, for a hearing on the petition.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: June 08, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)