MATTER H.M. v. E.T.

No. 48

14 N.Y.3d 521 (2010)

930 N.E.2d 206

904 N.Y.S.2d 285

In the Matter of H.M., Appellant, v. E.T., Respondent.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Decided May 4, 2010.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Proskauer Rose LLP, New York City ( Peter J.W. Sherwin,   Kenneth E. Aldous , Justin F. Heinrich and Nicole Haff of counsel), for appellant.

Nixon Peabody LLP, Rochester ( David H. Tennant and Erik A. Goergen of counsel), for respondent.

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, New York City ( Matthew L. Craner , Lisa M. Cirando and Scott Roehm of counsel), for New York County Lawyers' Association, amicus curiae.

Carmelyn P. Malalis , New York City, for New York City Bar Association, amicus curiae.

Chief Judge LIPPMAN and Judges SMITH and PIGOTT concur with Judge CIPARICK; Judge SMITH concurs in a separate concurring opinion; Judge JONES dissents and votes to affirm in another opinion in which Judges GRAFFEO and READ concur.


OPINION OF THE COURT

CIPARICK, J.

This appeal presents the issue whether Family Court has subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate a support petition brought pursuant to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) (Family Ct Act art 5-B) by a biological parent seeking child support from her former same-sex partner. We hold that Family Court possesses subject matter jurisdiction to hear such a petition...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases