D. S. S. v. Wolfe

• Decision Date: 06 June 1972
• Citation: 334 N.Y.S.2d 689,70 Misc.2d 590
• Parties: In the Matter of Paternity Petition of D.S.S. o/b/o Mabel B., * Petitioner, v. Leonard WOLFE, * Respondent. In the Matter of Paternity Petition of D.S.S. o/b/o Roberta B., * Petitioner, v. Leonard WOLFE, * Respondent.
• Court: New York City Court

Page 689

334 N.Y.S.2d 689

70 Misc.2d 590

In the Matter of Paternity Petition of D.S.S. o/b/o Mabel

B., ^* Petitioner, v. Leonard WOLFE, * Respondent.

In the Matter of Paternity Petition of D.S.S. o/b/o Roberta

B., * Petitioner, v. Leonard WOLFE, * Respondent.

Family Court, City of New York, New York County.

June 6, 1972.

J. Lee Rankin, Corp. Counsel (George Gutwirth, New York City, of counsel), for petitioner.

Marion Gaines Hill, New York City, for respondent.

Melvin R. Simensky, Brooklyn, for Grandmother.

DECISION

LOUIS OTTEN, Judge:

These two paternity proceedings present an interesting outgrowth of a proceeding on a writ of habeas corpus brought by the maternal grandmother of the children in the Supreme Court of Bronx County and referred to the Family Court, which proceeding relating to custody of the children is still pending. The decisions in the instant cases are not, nor are they intended to be, dispositive of the habeas corpus proceeding, although they may be relevant to the determination thereof. Accordingly, the petitioner in said proceeding (the maternal grandmother) and her attorney were allowed to be present and to participate in the paternity hearings.

The two children, both girls, subjects of these proceedings were born January 13, 1966 and April 20, 1967, respectively. Their mother died on August 16, 1970, at 24 years of age.

During her lifetime the mother received public assistance, and the records of the Department of Social Services which were received in evidence, indicate that on several occasions she named respondent as the father of the two children. As to the older child, Mabel, she did make other inconsistent statements. The respondent not only admits, but emphatically asserts that he is the father of both children. He is currently providing for their care and support and has for sometime had actual custody of the children.

The maternal grandmother who has custody of several halfsiblings of the children here involved, receives public assistance for the care of her charges. Consequently, absent findings of paternity, these two children are likely to become public charges. The proceedings therefore are properly originated by a public welfare official of the City of New York in accordance with section 522 of the Family Court Act and are timely instituted within the provisions of section 517(b) of that act.

Although the right of a putative father to maintain a paternity proceeding is highly questionable (Roe v. Roe, 65...