Call 855-808-4530 or email Gro[email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
This Court ‘ shall, from this day forward, allow the parties themselves to read the [forensic evaluation] report, as well as the raw material. With this one sentence (qualified by conditions designed to prevent substantial prejudice to either party and to preserve the confidentiality of the most sensitive of personal information that provided to a forensic evaluator in a custody matter) the court in J.F.D. v. J.D., 2014 NY Slip Op. 51547 (Sup. Ct., Nassau Cty, 10/17/14), took a singular step forward, effectively announcing a new policy in its IAS Part with respect to custody matters ‘ this, despite the fact that the application prompting this new policy requested relief more narrow than that which was ultimately granted. (Acting Nassau County Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey A. Goodstein recited in his decision that the relief sought by the husband was the release of the raw data and notes of the forensic evaluator so that his retained expert could review them for the purpose of preparing for cross-examination. The husband did not seek release of this underlying information to the parties.)
The author concludes this three-part article with more suggested arguments for saving a temporary maintenance agreement that does not contain the language and recitations required by subdivision 5-a(f) of DRL ' 236B.
Analysis of key rulings of important to New York family law practitioners.
A look at what's happening in neighboring states.
By Joel Stashenko
Monroe County Family Court Judge Joan Kohout handed a lesbian couple a disappointing decision when she determined that a married same-sex couple cannot use a marital statute to block a man's paternity petition for the child he fathered with one of the spouses during the women's marriage.