Opinion
December 2, 1999
Orders, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Judith Gische, J.).
Allan J. Berke, for plaintiff-appellant.
Linda Eichen, for defendant-respondent.
ELLERIN, P.J., ROSENBERGER, NARDELLI, MAZZARELLI, FRIEDMAN, JJ.
Forensic examinations of the parties and the child were properly directed to help resolve issues of fact as to whether visitation would be detrimental to the child's welfare (see, Weiss v. Weiss, 52 N.Y.2d 170, 175), and, if not, whether visitation should be supervised and "how best to re-introduce the defendant into the child's life". We disagree with plaintiff that this last directive suggests to the forensic psychologist a bias in favor of a report recommending visitation. We have considered and rejected plaintiff's other arguments, including that defendant has forfeited his right of visitation and that the forensic psychologist and law guardian should be held in contempt and disqualified for scheduling of a meeting (which never took place) between the child and defendant without the court's permission.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.