Justice Delayed is Justice Denied
For many reasons, family court cannot resolve most child protective and custody cases with any semblance of timeliness and hence justice, the author writes.
January 29, 2025 at 05:27 PM
8 minute read
By Merril Sobie
In the recent case of Alachi I. (Shelby J.), the Appellate Division, Third Department's opinion concludes with the following compassionate paragraph:
"Although Family court made meaningful and substantial efforts to hear and determine the matter promptly, this case now nonetheless clearly illustrates the adage that justice delayed is justice denied...It is imperative that we ensure that our systems are properly equipped to address the needs of Family Court litigants. This reversal now occurs after a potential separation of the three young children from their mother extending many years. We cannot discern what may have occurred in this enormous span of time...it instead appears that we have failed to address the pressing needs of this family, and the children, at each step [215 A.D.3d at 1019]."
In Alachi I. the children’s mother, who was severely abused by their father in the State of Georgia, had fled to New York where she resided in a shelter. The children were traumatized and had obviously been significantly impaired by their father. In New York, the mother, who was blameless, valiantly attempted to cope with her children’s problems, but received little requested assistance. Multiple child protective reports were filed despite her efforts and the lack of assistance. Subsequently, a Family Court Article 10 petition was filed, and the Family Court authorized the children’s removal, which continued for many years, through a finding of neglect and an appeal. By the time the appeal was decided, and the family thereby reunited the children and their mother had needlessly endured five or six years of separation and trauma.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllShifting Sands: May a Court Properly Order the Sale of the Marital Residence During a Divorce’s Pendency?
9 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Trial Court's Sidestep of 'Batson' Deprived Defendant of Challenge to Jury Discrimination
- 2Is Your Law Firm Growing Fast Enough? Scale, Consolidation and Competition
- 3Child Custody: The Dangers of 'Rules of Thumb'
- 4The Spectacle of Rudy Giuliani Returns to the SDNY
- 5Orrick Hires Longtime Weil Partner as New Head of Antitrust Litigation
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250