AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

In the Matter of ISIDRO A.-M., Appellant, v. MIRTA A., Respondent, et al., Respondent.

Although the subject order is not appealable as of right (Family Ct Act § 1112), leave to appeal is hereby granted ( see Matter of John A. v Bridget M., 36 AD3d 433).

Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the pro se petitioner's request for a copy of the forensic report, since he was permitted to review it in court. Thus, contrary to petitioner's contention, he was not denied access to the information ( see Family Ct Act § 166; Matter of Morrissey v Morrissey, 225 AD2d 779).

However, petitioner should be permitted to take notes during the in court review because he is proceeding pro se and opposing counsel have unfettered access to the report. As this issue is likely to arise again, we note the better practice in most cases would be to give counsel and pro se litigants access to the forensic report under the same conditions.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

IN RE ISIDRO A.-M
(Jun 24, 2010)