Matter of Latava P. v. Charles W.

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed an order denying the respondent father's objections to a child support order. The court held that Family Court and the Support Magistrate had jurisdiction over paternity and support issues, properly denied another adjournment, and rejected the respondent's remaining arguments concerning DNA testing and custodial-parent status.

Holdings

1. Family Court has exclusive original jurisdiction to adjudicate paternity and child-support proceedings, and the Support Magistrate properly heard and determined those matters between the unmarried parties.
2. The Family Court providently exercised its discretion in denying respondent's request for another adjournment.
3. Respondent could not prevail on his challenge to the order directing him to submit to DNA testing because he failed to exercise his right to challenge that order.
4. Respondent was not entitled to receive child support from petitioner because the record did not show that he had been a custodial parent since the commencement of the paternity action.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Family Court and the Support Magistrate had jurisdiction to adjudicate paternity and child support despite the parties' involvement in other legal proceedings.
2. Whether the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in denying respondent another adjournment.
3. Whether respondent was entitled to challenge the DNA-test order or receive child support as a custodial parent.
4. Whether the Support Magistrate properly issued an order of filiation and a final child-support order.

Disposition

affirmed