Legal Opinion
Smith v. Patrowski
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 19, 1996PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We agree with respondent that Family Court erred when it awarded temporary custody *1074of the parties’ son to petitioner without conducting an evidentiary hearing (see, Matter of Farrelly-Brew v Moore, 221 AD2d 1000; Van Etten v Van Etten, 207 AD2d 992; Kronenberger v Kronenberger, 204 AD2d 1059, 1060). There is no need to reverse, however, because the court subsequently conducted an evidentiary hearing. The record of that hearing fully supports the court’s determination that a change in custody is in the best interests of the child (see,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Eschbach v. EschbachNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Louise E. S. v. W. Stephen S.New York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Van Etten v. Van EttenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Farrelly-Brew v. MooreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Kronenberger v. KronenbergerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
3Cited by10 opinions
- Humberstone v. WheatonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Darryl B.W. v. Sharon M.W.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Tolbert v. ScottAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Naughton-General v. NaughtonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Heintz v. HeintzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.