Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985

Kathleen EE v. Kevin FF

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided June 20, 1985 · Mahoney

111 A.D.2d 1046; 490 N.Y.S.2d 627; 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50285

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

Kozak v. McCormack (NYC Family Court 1994)
Department of Social Services ex rel. Debra L. v. William J. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
Penny MM. v. Bruce MM. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Mahoney, P. J.,

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Albany County (Coffey, Jr., J.), entered May 18, 1984, which dismissed a petition seeking a declaration that respondent is the father of a child born to petitioner.

Petitioner commenced this proceeding seeking a declaration that respondent was the father of her child. After a hearing, Family Court found that petitioner failed to establish paternity by clear and convincing evidence and dismissed the petition. This appeal by petitioner ensued.

Petitioner testified in her own behalf and Family Court found that her testimony had a number of inconsistencies. Petitioner admitted that she was intoxicated on the night in question and that she was unable to recall any specific details of the alleged act of sexual intercourse. Respondent offered the testimony of witnesses which contradicted certain portions of petitioner’s testimony. Petitioner also introduced into evidence a human leucocyte antigen (HLA) test report which indicated a probability of 98.1% that respondent was the father of petitioner’s child. Because of the conflicting testimony, a question of credibility was presented which Family Court was in the best position to resolve. The HLA test report was simply another fact to be considered. Based on the entire record, we see no basis for disturbing Family Court’s finding (see, Matter of Kimiecik v Jesse U., 111 AD2d 976; Matter of Julie UU. v Joseph VV., 108 AD2d 1038). We note with regard to the HLA test report that only an HLA test was done. The test was not done in conjunction with red blood cell antigen, serum protein and red blood cell enzyme tests.

Order affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.