In a rare post-dispositional decision made after a father had already gained custody of his children, a state appeals court has ruled that the father’s 2018 motion in Family Court for an expedited hearing should have been granted.

And the Appellate Division, First Department, in a lengthy, signed opinion written by Justice Anil Singh, made clear that the 2018 hearing on whether the children should be returned to the father should not have spooled out over six months because of attorney and court scheduling conflicts.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]