Search for: "A.D., the mother v. Department of Children and Families"
Results 41 - 60
of 82
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 May 2015, 9:00 pm
., Petitioner, v. [read post]
8 Apr 2015, 11:08 am
34 A.D.3d 802 825 N.Y.S.2d 239 2006 NY Slip Op 8978 In the Matter of SURIYA ELNATANOVA, Respondent, v. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 6:46 pm
Schwartz, 139 A.D.2d 640, 527 N.Y.S.2d 279; Davis v. [read post]
8 Jan 2015, 2:16 pm
Shumway, 273 A.D.2d 753, 756 where the Third Department said that: “A Law Guardian should not have a particular position or decision in mind at the outset of the case before the gathering of evidence. [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 5:57 am
Chaplin, 107 A.D.3d at 883, 969 N.Y.S.2d 67). [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 6:21 am
Terrance J. ,96 A.D.3d 482, 945 N.Y.S.2d 693 (1st Dept); Matter of Brazie v. [read post]
9 Dec 2013, 7:13 am
Justice Cooper found the “de-chattelization” of household pets supported by the First Department decision in Raymond v. [read post]
6 Oct 2013, 9:01 pm
When the father’s relationship with the children broke down, the mother petitioned the Steuben County Family Court for an upward modification of the father’s child support obligation. [read post]
28 Jul 2013, 9:01 pm
Such is the lesson of the July 10, 2013 decision of the Appellate Division, Second Department, in Samuelson v. [read post]
21 May 2013, 6:25 pm
In Melody M. v Robert M., 103 A.D.3d 932 (3rd Dept. 2013), the Third Department affirmed a Family Court order that among other changes to the prior joint custody, issued an order of protection against the mother that prohibited her from, among other things, posting any communications to or about the children on any social network site. [read post]
15 May 2013, 6:55 am
the Appellate Division, First Department rejected the rule established in Baraby v Baraby, 250 A.D.2d 201, 681 N.Y.S.2d 826 (3d Dept, 1998), that in an equally shared custody case the parent who has the greater income should be considered the noncustodial parent for purposes of support. [read post]
11 Feb 2013, 7:12 am
In Prohaszka v. [read post]
9 Sep 2012, 10:46 am
The parties had four children, one of whom was a minor at the time the trial was commenced. [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 3:06 pm
The Court pointed out that in True v. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 6:58 am
The Court pointed out that in True v. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 7:04 am
Family Court determined that the petition was barred by res judicata and dismissed the petition. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 8:43 am
There were no children of the marriage. [read post]
12 Feb 2012, 10:42 am
The Department has no legal authority with respect to the children at this time. [read post]
4 Feb 2012, 8:15 pm
In Miller v Miller, 90 A.D.3d 1185 (N.Y.A.D. 3 Dept.) the parties were the parents of two children, born in 2004 and 2005. [read post]
4 Feb 2012, 8:15 pm
In Miller v Miller, 90 A.D.3d 1185 (N.Y.A.D. 3 Dept.) the parties were the parents of two children, born in 2004 and 2005. [read post]
