Frank G. v. Renee P.-F.
| Decision Date | 06 September 2016 |
| Parties | In the Matter of FRANK G. (Anonymous), appellant, v. Renee P.-F. (Anonymous), et al., respondents. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Renee P.-F. (Anonymous), respondent, v. Frank G. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Joseph P. (Anonymous), respondent, v. Frank G. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 3). |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Meth Law Offices, P.C., Chester, NY (Michael D. Meth and Bianca Formisano of counsel), for appellant.
Bloom & Bloom, P.C., New Windsor, NY (Kathleen L. Bloom of counsel), for respondent Joseph P.
Gloria Marchetti–Bruck, Mount Kisco, NY, attorney for the children.
L. PRISCILLA HALL, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, ROBERT J. MILLER, and BETSY BARROS, JJ.
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Lori Currier Woods, J.), dated August 21, 2015.
The order, insofar as appealed from, after a hearing, denied Frank G.'s motion, in effect, to dismiss Joseph P.'s petition for custody of the subject children for lack of standing and determined that Joseph P. has standing to seek custody and/or visitation with the subject children.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
According to the testimony at the hearing in this custody matter, Joseph P. (hereinafter Joseph) and Frank G. (hereinafter Frank) were domestic partners who lived together in New York State from 2009 through February 2014. As they both desired to have children genetically related to both of them, they asked Joseph's sister, Renee P.-F. (hereinafter Renee), to act as a surrogate. Renee, who had her own children, had previously promised her brother that she would carry a child for him after he met his life partner. Renee executed a surrogacy contract in which she agreed to be impregnated with Frank's sperm and to surrender her parental rights in order for Joseph to adopt the child or children. The understanding between herself, Joseph, and Frank was that Joseph and Frank would be the parents of the children, and that she would remain a part of the children's lives. After undergoing in vitro fertilization, Renee gave birth to fraternal twins, Giovanna and Lucciano (hereinafter the children), in February 2010.
During the first four years of the children's lives, Joseph and Frank equally shared the rights and responsibilities of parenthood, although Joseph did not legally adopt the children. The children regarded both of them as their parents. They called Joseph “dada,” and Frank “dad.” During that period, Renee frequently saw the children. In early 2014, Joseph and Frank separated, and the children continued to reside with Frank. Even so, Joseph, acting in a parental role, visited and cared for the children on a daily basis. However, in May 2014, Frank suddenly refused to allow Joseph or Renee to have any access to the children. In December 2014, Frank moved to Florida with the children without informing Joseph or Renee, or seeking permission from the court.
Thereafter, Renee filed for custody of the children and for immediate access, and Joseph petitioned to be appointed guardian of the children. In June 2015, Joseph withdrew his guardianship petition, and commenced a proceeding seeking custody of the children. Frank moved, in effect, to dismiss Joseph's custody petition on the ground, inter alia, that Joseph lacked standing under Domestic Relations Law § 70. After conducting an evidentiary hearing, the Family Court denied Frank's motion in an order dated August 21, 2015. Frank appeals from that order.
Domestic Relations Law § 70 provides as follows:
The statute does not define “parent.” In Matter of Alison D. v. Virginia M. , 77 N.Y.2d 651, 569 N.Y.S.2d 586...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Newhampshire v. Jesus R. & Brenda S.
...agreement between the parent and her partner, not between two parents and one parent's partner. In Matter of Frank G. v. Renee P.-F., 142 A.D.3d 928, 929, 37 N.Y.S.3d 155 (2d Dept. 2016), lv dismissed 28 N.Y.3d 1050, 43 N.Y.S.3d 247, 65 N.E.3d 1282 [2016] ), the mother agreed to be a surrog......
-
Renee P.-F. v. Frank G.
...the custody petitions (see Matter of Giavonna F.P.–G. [Frank G.–Renee P.–F.], 142 A.D.3d 931, 36 N.Y.S.3d 892 ; Matter of Frank G. v. Renee P.–F., 142 A.D.3d 928, 37 N.Y.S.3d 155 ).On remittitur, the Family Court, after a hearing, issued an order dated February 14, 2017, upon a decision als......
-
Heather NN. v. Vinnette OO.
...to her subsequent relationship with the child (see id. at 27–28, 39 N.Y.S.3d 89, 61 N.E.3d 488 ; Matter of Frank G. v. Renee P.-F. , 142 A.D.3d 928, 930–931, 37 N.Y.S.3d 155 [2016], lv dismissed 28 N.Y.3d 1050, 43 N.Y.S.3d 247, 65 N.E.3d 1282 [2016] ; compare Matter of K.G. v. C.H. , 163 A.......
-
In re John., 2018–06336
...of the parties' unequivocal intention" that the intended parents become the parents of the child ( Matter of Frank G. v. Renee P.-F., 142 A.D.3d 928, 930, 37 N.Y.S.3d 155 ).The appellant, at present, has no legal relationship with the child, and the record before us indicates that the surro......