Legal Opinion · Dissent

Prowda v. Wilner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 7, 1995Published

1Dissent

Casey, J. (dissenting).

I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that defendant’s request for blood-grouping tests did not have to be accompanied by any factual showing to support his conclusory denial of paternity of the child born during the parties’ marriage. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.

My disagreement with the majority is twofold. Family Court Act § 418 (a) applies to support proceedings in Family Court. Defendant’s request was made in a divorce action in Supreme Court and, therefore, the request is governed by CPLR 3121 (a), which gives the court discretionary authority to order…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Koump v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
  2. Vito L. v. Filomena L.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  3. Murtagh v. MurtaghAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
  4. Kimberly A. v. Vincent A.New York City Family Court · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API