From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re David A.A

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 8, 2007
41 A.D.3d 1300 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. CAF 05-02271.

June 8, 2007.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Livingston County (Ronald A. Cicoria, J.), entered September 6, 2005 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order granted petitioner's motion for a default order and awarded sole legal custody of the parties' child to petitioner and visitation to respondent.

THE PARKS LAW OFFICE, P.C., ITHACA (DAVID M. PARKS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

JAMES W. CAMPBELL, JR., LAW GUARDIAN, LIMA, FOR RACHEL L.A.

Present — Hurlbutt, J.P., Martoche, Smith, Fahey and Green, JJ.


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: 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 AD2d 860; Matter of Kwasi S., 221 AD2d 1029), 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 AD2d 961, 963). 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 AD2d 723, 724). 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.


Summaries of

In re David A.A

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 8, 2007
41 A.D.3d 1300 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

In re David A.A

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of DAVID A.A., Respondent, v. MARYANN A., Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 8, 2007

Citations

41 A.D.3d 1300 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 5053
837 N.Y.S.2d 479

Citing Cases

Reardon v. Krause

Subject to limited exceptions not applicable here, a party "may prosecute or defend a civil action in person…

Reardon v. Krause

Subject to limited exceptions not applicable here, a party "may prosecute or defend a civil action in person…