Legal Opinion

Heinlein v. Heinlein

New York City Family Court

Decided June 15, 1995PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Anthony J. Sciolino, J.

The above-named petitioner, pursuant to the provisions of *358section 439 of the Family Court Act, has filed written objections to the temporary order of the Hearing Examiner.

The court has reviewed the pleadings and written objections and the tape recorded hearing and finds as follows:

The petitioner in this matter has filed objections to the temporary order of the Hearing Examiner. Family Court Act § 439 (e) states: "The determination of a hearing examiner shall include findings of fact and a final order which shall be entered and transmitted to the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bernstein v. BernsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
  2. Byer v. ByerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  3. Rizzo v. RizzoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  4. Bernstein v. BernsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
  5. Dunbar v. HunterNew York City Family Court · 1986

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Matter of Carmen R. v. Luis I.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API