Scott v. Adrat
| Decision Date | 14 July 2021 |
| Docket Number | 2019–11995,Docket No. F–15916–16 |
| Citation | 151 N.Y.S.3d 431,196 A.D.3d 585 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Jasmin SCOTT, respondent, v. Ileana ADRAT, etc., appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
196 A.D.3d 585
151 N.Y.S.3d 431
In the Matter of Jasmin SCOTT, respondent,
v.
Ileana ADRAT, etc., appellant.
2019–11995
Docket No. F–15916–16
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Argued—June 21, 2021
July 14, 2021
The Law Office of Katherine Ryan, P.C., Garden City, NY, for appellant.
Legal Services of the Hudson Valley, Peekskill, N.Y. (Shary Enid Sanchez of counsel), for respondent.
Lawrence S. Horowitz, White Plains, NY, attorney for the children.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, Ileana Adrat appeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Mary Anne Scattaretico–Naber, J.), dated October 3, 2019. The order denied Ileana Adrat's objections to an order of the same court (Michele Reed Bowman, S.M.) dated July 24, 2019, which, after a hearing and upon findings of fact dated July 24, 2019, inter alia, in effect, granted Jasmin Scott's petition seeking child support and directed Ileana Adrat to pay child support in the sum of $1,727 per month.
ORDERED that the order dated October 3, 2019, is affirmed, with costs.
Ileana Adrat and Jasmin Scott entered into a same-sex relationship in November 2008. The parties agreed to conceive and raise children together in December 2008 or January 2009. They began attempting to conceive through artificial insemination. After an alleged domestic violence incident, the parties broke up in November or December 2009. The evidence at a hearing established that the parties resumed their relationship between two weeks and two months later. Beginning in February 2010, the parties went to a new fertility clinic. In April 2010, Scott learned that she was pregnant with twins, and the children were born later that year. After another domestic violence incident in April 2011, the parties terminated whatever relationship they had at the time, and Scott
and the children moved out of the home. It is undisputed that Adrat last saw the children at a court appearance in May or June 2011 and has not supported the children since that time.
On December 27, 2016, following the Court of Appeals' ruling in Matter of Brooke S.B. v. Elizabeth A.C.C., 28 N.Y.3d 1, 61 N.E.3d 488, Scott filed a petition seeking child support against Adrat. Adrat moved to dismiss the petition, and the Support Magistrate referred the matter to a Family Court Judge for a hearing on the issue of whether Adrat was legally responsible for the support of the children. By amended order dated February 5, 2019, the Family Court found that Adrat is the non-biological parent of the children, and thus, responsible for financially support them. The court remitted the matter to the Support Magistrate for the issuance of an order of support. By order dated...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Admin. for Children's Servs. v. Homere B. (In re Junny B.)
...whether the imminent risk to the child can be mitigated by reasonable efforts to avoid removal’ " ( Matter of Zaniyah R.-T. [Wanda R.], 196 A.D.3d at 585, 147 N.Y.S.3d 464, quoting 154 N.Y.S.3d 849 Nicholson v. Scoppetta, 3 N.Y.3d 357, 378, 787 N.Y.S.2d 196, 820 N.E.2d 840 ; see Matter of T......
- In re Junny B.