In this matter the Hearing Examiner's decision and order was entered on June 25, 1993 and not transmitted to this pro se petitioner until July 12, 1993. Thereafter, the petitioner was apparently misinformed with respect to the time period in which she was required to submit her objections. Under these circumstances we decline to strictly impose the filing deadlines of Family Court Act § 439 (e) (Obremski v Dietrich, 208 A.D.2d 474; see also, Matter of Canfield v Canfield, 185 A.D.2d 611). Therefore, we find that the Family Court should not have denied petitioner's objections as untimely (see also, Matter of Geary v Breen, 210 A.D.2d 975), and should have considered this petitioner's objections on the merits.
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman, Ross and Mazzarelli, JJ.