Opinion
July 13, 1970
In a paternity proceeding in which appellant on June 9, 1964 was adjudged the father of a child born on February 6, 1964, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated December 11, 1968, which denied appellant's application to obtain a blood test and, in the alternative, to reopen the paternity adjudication. Order modified to the extent of granting appellant's application for a blood grouping test. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, in view of the lack of a finding by the trial court on June 9, 1964 that appellant and his mother fully comprehended the legal import of waiver of counsel and of the blood test, when appellant, a 16-year-old youth admitted paternity, considerations of due process may have been impinged ( Matter of Gault, 387 U.S. 1; Matter of William L., 29 A.D.2d 182). Absence of counsel makes vulnerable an infant's admissions against interest in the Family Court; and in the interests of justice the oversight should be remedied ( Matter of Celli, 27 A.D.2d 702; Matter of Cardinal [ Munyan], 30 A.D.2d 444; Matter of Steven B., 30 A.D.2d 442; Matter of Richard W., 29 A.D.2d 873). In any event, a blood grouping test is still an issue to be considered in support proceedings (Family Ct. Act, § 418), in which appellant's present application for relief was made. Considerations of whether the alternative relief requested should be granted, i.e., a new trial of the paternity issue itself, may well be postponed until the completion of the blood test. At that time, the alleged elements of laches, prejudice to petitioner's case by reason of the alleged lack of information as to present locations of witnesses, the res judicata quality of the paternity order of June 9, 1964 and like questions may be considered. At the moment, they are premature and may even prove to be academic. Christ, P.J., Rabin, Hopkins, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.