Schenectady County Department of Social Services on Behalf of Q. Q. v. Hilvan R. R.
| Decision Date | 28 April 1977 |
| Parties | In the Matter of SCHENECTADY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, on behalf of Kay Q. Q. * , Respondent, v. HILVAN R. R.*, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Louis-Jack Pozner, Albany, for appellant.
Edmund J. Nagorka, Schenectady, for respondent.
Before GREENBLOTT, J. P., and SWEENEY, MAIN, LARKIN and HERLIHY, JJ.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Schenectady County, entered November 9, 1972, which adjudged appellant to be the father of petitioner's child and ordered appellant to pay $15 per week in support payments for the child.
Ramone "QQ" was born December 12, 1967. His mother, Kay "QQ", was married at the time, and remained married up until her death subsequent to the trial of this action. She and her husband had been separated, however, since December 31, 1965. The record reveals that she and her estranged husband met infrequently after their separation, once in April, 1966, after Mrs. "QQ" broke her leg, when he cared for their children, and twice in 1967. Mr. "QQ" moved from Schenectady to New Jersey in July, 1966 and then to Pennsylvania. He returned to visit the children on Easter Sunday, March 28, 1967, accompanied by two men and a woman. He stayed briefly to give the children Easter baskets, and then gave Mrs. "QQ" a ride to her mother's house. He also visited her in late August or September of 1967.
Mrs. "QQ" testified that she met the appellant through her husband in 1961 and began an extramarital affair in 1963. The affair lasted until 1968, although sexual relations tapered off to an average of once a month from 1965 through the end. Mrs. "QQ" testified to relations with appellant five or six times during the first few months of 1967. She had her last menstrual period in February, 1967.
On the other hand, the record indicates that Mrs. "QQ" admitted lying on at least two prior occasions, once telling her Department of Social Services caseworker that Mr. "QQ" was the father of the child and giving the same information to the clinic handling the childbirth. Mrs. "QQ" gave two explanations: first that she was embarrassed to admit to the affair with appellant since she was a married woman and, second, that she was afraid to tell the truth for fear that she would lose her other children if she admitted to an extramarital affair in open court. Her expression of these fears was corroborated by a caseworker with Social Services. Other witnesses corroborated what appeared to be a relationship between Mrs. "QQ" and the appellant.
In this action, brought by the Schenectady County Department of Social Services four and one-half years after childbirth to determine paternity and recover support payments, the Schenectady County Family Court found appellant to be the father of Ramone. The court found Mrs. "QQ" to have been a credible witness, found that she had had an extended affair with the appellant, and held that even though Mrs. "QQ" was still married, she established non-access by her husband sufficient to overcome the strong presumption of the child's legitimacy.
Where a child born to a woman who is married at the time of conception and birth is claimed to have been fathered by another man, the petitioner must clearly establish non-access by the husband and must overcome the presumption of legitimacy, one of the strongest presumptions known to law. As stated by Chief Judge Cardozo in Matter of Findlay, 253 N.Y. 1, 170 N.E. 471:
countervailing evidence may shatter the presumption though the possibility of access is not susceptible of exclusion to the point of utter demonstration. * * * If husband and wife are living together in the conjugal relation, legitimacy will be presumed though the wife has harbored an adulterer (citations omitted). It may even be presumed though the spouses are living apart if there is a fair basis for the belief that at times they may have come together. Whether such a basis exists in any given instance is to be determined, however, in the light of experience and reason (id. at 8, 170 N.E. at 473).
Thus, petitioner faces a substantial burden (see Matter of Gray v. Rose, 32 A.D.2d 994, 302 N.Y.S.2d 185).
Since the testimony concerning sexual relations between the appellant and the mother is clear, consistent and uncontradicted, the only point of contention is Mrs. "QQ's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Czajak v. Vavonese
...1977); See: Cicero v. Cicero, 58 A.D.2d 573, 395 N.Y.S.2d 117 (2d Dept. 1977); Matter of Schenectady County Department of Social Services v. Hilvan R. R., 57 A.D.2d 688, 394 N.Y.S.2d 71 (3d Dept. 1977); Matter of Irma N. v. Carlos A. F., 46 A.D.2d 893, 361 N.Y.S.2d 701 (2d Dept. 1974); Comm......
-
La Croix v. Deyo
...with questions of credibility and such questions are usually left to the trier of fact (Matter of Schenectady County Dept. of Social Servs. v. Hilvan RR, 57 A.D.2d 688, 394 N.Y.S.2d 71). We find no reason on this record to disturb the court's decision in this regard. From our review of the ......
-
Paternity Petition of Com'r of Social Services of City of New York, Matter of
...not conclusive, but, rather can be overcome by clear and convincing evidence of illegitimacy. Schenectady County Dept. of Social Services v. R.R., 57 A.D.2d 688, 394 N.Y.S.2d 71 (3rd Dept., 1977); Richardson, Evidence [10th ed.] sec. 59. The presumption of legitimacy is a rule of evidence r......
-
State ex rel. H. v. P.
...known to the law." (Matter of Findlay, 253 N.Y. 1, 7, 170 N.E. 471 citing cases; see Matter of Schenectady County Dept. of Social Servs. v. Hilvan RR, 57 A.D.2d 688, 689, 394 N.Y.S.2d 71.) Rooted in the common law, its force was so potent that neither spouse was competent to testify to non-......