Legal Opinion

In re M. Z.

New York City Family Court

Decided September 16, 1992PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Minna R. Buck, J.

On motion of respondents, a pretrial hearing was held concerning the admissibility in a fact-finding proceeding under *565article 10 of the Family Court Act of certain evidence obtained through a technique known as "facilitated communication”. (See below.) At the conclusion of petitioner’s proof, respondents moved to preclude such testimony on the grounds that petitioner had failed to present a prima facie case as to its admissibility.

NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE

As described to the court, "facilitated communication” is a technique whereby the "speaker’s” hand,…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. In re Nicole V.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. De Long v. County of ErieNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  4. People v. AllweissNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  5. People v. CroninNew York Court of Appeals · 1983

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. WardenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1995
  2. People v. BohrerPenfield Justice Court · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API