From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Marie v. Michael

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 16, 1993
195 A.D.2d 985 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

July 16, 1993

Appeal from the Niagara County Family Court, Halpin, J.

Present — Callahan, J.P., Balio, Doerr, Boomer and Boehm, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner's child, now 5 1/2 years old, was conceived while petitioner was married. The child has lived with petitioner and petitioner's husband for most of her life and for all of her life the husband has been supporting her and has been known as her father. After recently commencing a divorce action, petitioner commenced this filiation proceeding in Family Court alleging that someone other than her husband was the father of the child. The person she alleges to be the father denies paternity, whereas her husband desires to continue his relationship as the child's father and he continues to support the child. Based upon those undisputed facts, Family Court properly denied, upon reconsideration, petitioner's application for a blood test and properly dismissed the petition.

"Common sense, public policy, reason and the overriding consideration for the welfare of the child will bar a wife from bastardizing her child where, as here, she lived with her husband as his wife during the period of conception and birth of the child and for * * * years thereafter" (Hill v. Hill, 20 A.D.2d 923, 924) and where the husband has supported and nurtured the child for all of the child's life. Estoppel is especially appropriate here, where petitioner waited almost six years to bring this filiation proceeding and where the husband desires a continuing relationship with the child and the alleged father, a stranger to the child, denies paternity (see, e.g., Matter of Ettore I. v. Angela D., 127 A.D.2d 6; Matter of Boyles v. Boyles, 95 A.D.2d 95, 97-98). "No purpose would be served by branding the child `illegitimate' and depriving her of the only father she has ever known" (Vito L. v. Filomena L., 172 A.D.2d 648, 651).


Summaries of

Matter of Marie v. Michael

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 16, 1993
195 A.D.2d 985 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Matter of Marie v. Michael

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of KIM MARIE V., Appellant, v. MICHAEL S., Respondent…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jul 16, 1993

Citations

195 A.D.2d 985 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
601 N.Y.S.2d 719

Citing Cases

Matter of Marie v. Gary

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Same Memorandum as in Matter of Kim Marie V. v. Michael S. ( 195…

Maby H. v. Joseph H.

One year later the former wife sought sole custody, alleging that the former husband was not the child's…