Charity Akosua A. v. Nana A., 15855.

• Decision Date: 13 October 2015
• Docket Number: 15855.
• Parties: In re CHARITY AKOSUA A., Petitioner–Respondent, v. NANA A., Respondent–Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

132 A.D.3d 462
18 N.Y.S.3d 371
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 07443

In re CHARITY AKOSUA A., Petitioner–Respondent
v.
NANA A., Respondent–Appellant.

15855.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Oct. 13, 2015.

18 N.Y.S.3d 372

Larry S. Bachner, Jamaica, for appellant.

Julian A. Hertz, Somers, attorney for the child.

TOM, J.P., ACOSTA, RICHTER, and KAPNICK, JJ.

Opinion

132 A.D.3d 462

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Ruben A. Martino, J.), entered on or about November 19, 2013, which denied respondent-appellant's (hereinafter, respondent) objection to a final order of support and an order of filiation; order of filiation, same court (Mary Elizabeth Neggie, Support Magistrate), entered on or about October 25, 2013, which adjudged and declared respondent to be the father of the subject child; and order of support, same court and Support Magistrate, entered on or about October 25, 2013, which, among other things, ordered respondent to pay $181 semi-monthly for child support and 65% of any unreimbursed health related expenses for the child, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Support Magistrate correctly referred the equitable estoppel issue to a Family Court judge (see Family Court Act § 439[a], [b] ). The Family Court Judge, in turn, properly recognized that a finding on equitable estoppel was unnecessary, and properly referred the matter back to the Support Magistrate (see id. ).

The Family Court properly determined that there was clear and convincing evidence establishing respondent's paternity (Matter of Lopez v. Sanchez, 34 N.Y.2d 662, 663, 355 N.Y.S.2d 581, 311 N.E.2d 652 [1974] ; see also Matter of Meaghan E.A. v. John T.H., 293 A.D.2d 399, 400, 745 N.Y.S.2d 5 [1st Dept.2002], lv. dismissed 99 N.Y.2d 531, 752 N.Y.S.2d 590, 782 N.E.2d 568 [2002] ). Testimony and evidence showed that respondent was named as the father on the child's birth certificate, that he had an ongoing father-daughter relationship with the child for 10 years, and that...