Legal Opinion
Panzo v. Panzo
New York Family Court
Decided July 8, 1948PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSicher, J.
In this proceeding, instituted nominally on behalf of an infant grandchild, the real party in interest is the department of welfare of the city of New York, seeking exoneration from the cost of maintaining the infant grandchild of respondent.
*991The infant’s father is the son of respondent.
As hereinafter more fully related, he disappeared from New York City shortly after entry of an order of this court against him for support of his then pregnant wife (“ Anita Panzo ”, Petitioner, v. ‘‘Alfredo Panzo, Jr.”, Respondent, Docket No. 2018/1947); there is now outstanding a warrant for his arrest issued…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Schacht v. SchachtNew York Family Court · 1946
- Helman v. HelmanNew York Family Court · 1947
- Prindle v. DearbornNew York Family Court · 1936
- Bergman v. BuechlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
- Calhoun v. CalhounAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lister v. SheridanNew York Supreme Court · 1962
- Rotina ex rel. Rotina v. RotinaNew York Family Court · 1953