AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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

In the Matter of FRANCIS J. KAPZYNSKI, Appellant-Respondent, v. MARY KAPZYNSKI, Respondent-Appellant.

Order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated January 18, 1968, affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. This custody proceeding, brought on by petition and order to show cause, was referred to the Family Court by order of the Supreme Court. Section 651 FCT of the Family Court Act provides, in such cases, that "the family court has jurisdiction to determine, with the same powers possessed by the supreme court * * * proceedings * * * for the determination of the custody of minors" (emphasis supplied). Further, subdivision (b) of section 237 Dom. Rel. of the Domestic Relations Law contains explicit authority for the award of counsel fees in custody proceedings in the Supreme Court. Therefore, it is clear the Family Court must also have power to award counsel fees in a custody proceeding referred to it, for a hearing de novo, by the Supreme Court. Christ, Acting P.J., Brennan, Rabin, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF KAPZYNSKI v. KAPZYNSKI
(Oct 7, 1968)