Venus B. v. Danillo S.
New York City Family Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Jack Turret, J.
In a paternity proceeding filed on March 24, 1981, four years after the birth of the child, the respondent alleged father moves to dismiss on the ground that the proceeding is time barred pursuant to section 517 of the Family Court Act. The petitioner’s opposition is based on her allegation that respondent, by actions constituting an informal acknowledgment of paternity, fraudulently induced her to forego legal proceedings until the statutory time limit had been passed. Petitioner seeks her “day in court” so as to *196offer evidence demonstrating respondent’s…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Eisenstadt v. BairdSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Commissioner of Public Welfare v. KoehlerNew York Court of Appeals · 1940
- Borkowski v. BorkowskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
- Howard v. RobinsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Anderson v. SheffieldCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1983
- Millson v. ManfredoNew York City Family Court · 1985