Legal Opinion
In re Samantha P.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided August 19, 2002PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The determination whether to relieve a party of an order entered upon his or her default is a matter left to the sound discretion of the Family Court (see Matter of Samaria Ann B., 293 AD2d 532; Matter of Latisha I., 238 AD2d 340). Contrary to the mother’s contention, the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in denying her motion to vacate her default in appearing at the fact-finding and dispositional hearings since she did not offer a reasonable excuse for twice failing to appear in court on dates scheduled for commencement of the hearing, and did not demonstrate the existence…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In re Adam S.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- In re Samaria Ann B.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- In re Tiffany L.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- In re Willie Mays J.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
3Cited by8 opinions
- In re Tenisha Tishonda T.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Kenneth S. v. Bethzaida P.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- In re Joseph N.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- In re Viergela A. Granham-Windham Services to Families & ChildrenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- In re Francisco R.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.