Paul B. S. v. Pamela J. S.
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Supreme Court’s concurrent jurisdiction over child abuse proceedings is unaffected by the grant of "exclusive original jurisdiction” to Family Court over such proceedings (see, NY Const, art VI, § 7; Family Ct Act §§ 114, 1013; Kagen v Kagen, 21 NY2d 532, 538). The question remains, however, whether Supreme Court abused its discretion as a matter of law in exercising its concurrent jurisdiction in the instant case (see, Kagen v Kagen, supra, at 538; see also, Herrick v Second Cuthouse, 64 NY2d…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Kagen v. KagenNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
- Herrick v. Second Cuthouse, Ltd.New York Court of Appeals · 1984
3Cited by20 opinions
- Nacson v. NacsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Zafran v. ZafranAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Burp v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1993
- In re Daniel D.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Vanderhoff v. VanderhoffAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.