In a significant opinion interpreting Family Court Act article 8, the Fourth Department holds that an attorney for the child has authority to file a family offense petition on behalf of a child against a nonparent, broadening access to protective relief for children.
The Fourth Department disbars an attorney who was convicted of two federal felonies, finding the aggravating factors including use of legal skills in furtherance of criminal conduct far outweigh mitigating factors.
The Fourth Department modifies Surrogate’s Court’s order in a will and trust contest by reinstating the objectant’s undue influence claim, finding triable issues of fact on whether the decedent’s will amendments were the product of undue influence.
The Fourth Department affirms Family Court’s summary dismissal of a mother’s petition to modify custody from supervised to unsupervised visitation, finding she failed to make a sufficient evidentiary showing of changed circumstances.
The Fourth Department affirms Family Court’s determination that the respondent father neglected his children and upholds the continuation of foster care placement.
The Fourth Department affirms County Court’s acceptance of a grand jury report under CPL 190.85 recommending the removal of a City Court Judge for misconduct in office, rejecting challenges to the grand jury proceedings.
The Fourth Department affirms Family Court’s modification of custody awarding primary physical custody and final decision-making authority to the father based on changed circumstances and the best interests of the children.
The Fourth Department affirms a discovery order directing disclosure of certain records in a motor vehicle injury case while declining to extend an IME examination or compel Medicaid billing records.
The Fourth Department affirms denial of defendants’ motion to bifurcate liability and damages in a motor vehicle accident case, finding the trial court properly exercised its discretion.
The Fourth Department held that a standard commercial lease attorney’s fees clause does not authorize “fees on fees” — recovery of fees incurred to collect a prior attorney’s fee award — absent unmistakably clear contractual language, and further held that failure to object to a referee’s denial of CPLR 5001 prejudgment interest waives that argument on appeal.