Legal Opinion · Dissent

In re Michael WW.

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

Decided April 21, 1994Published

1Dissent

Mikoll, J. P.

(dissenting). I respectfully dissent.

The Law Guardian’s contention that Family Court abused its discretion in denying his application to compel respondent Roy XX. to undergo HIV-related blood testing is persuasive. Family Court’s order denying the Law Guardian’s motion should be reversed and the motion granted.

Authority for Family Court to compel a respondent to submit to HIV-related blood testing is found in Family Court Act § 1038-a, which provides that: "the court may order a *765respondent to provide nontestimonial evidence, only if the court finds probable cause that the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Osborne v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  2. In re Charles DD.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  3. Department of Social Services ex rel. Troy C. v. Janice T.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API