Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

LEWELLYN J. BRITE v. DENVER BRITE (10/31/69)

FAMILY COURT OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK COUNTY 1969.NY.43397 <http://www.versuslaw.com>; 305 N.Y.S.2d 65; 61 Misc. 2d 10 October 31, 1969 LEWELLYN J. BRITE, MOTHER ON BEHALF OF KAREN C. BRITE, PETITIONERv.DENVER BRITE, RESPONDENT.*FN* J. Lee Rankin, Corporation Counsel (Larry K. Schwartzstein of counsel), for petitioner. Shyler Barrack and Anita C. Lobo for respondent. Gertrude M. Bacon, J. Author: Bacon


Gertrude M. Bacon, J.

Author: Bacon

 Petitioner and respondent were married in New York on August 22, 1959.

A child was born of this marriage named Karen Charlene Brite on January 27, 1963.

On November 5, 1965 both parties entered into a separation agreement which was incorporated by reference into a subsequent divorce obtained by respondent in Chihuahua, Mexico.

Respondent appeared in person and obtained final decree on December 1, 1965.

Provisions were made for support of the daughter and for custody and guardianship with petitioner and possible visitation rights for respondent.

During marriage and in the separation agreement respondent acknowledged the child and in the divorce proceedings respondent acknowledged the child as the child of the marriage and provided for support of said child in the separation agreement.

On June 10, 1969 petitioner sought to enforce support provisions of the separation agreement for the child in the Family Court.

On July 22, 1969 respondent disputed paternity and blood grouping tests were ordered.

It is noteworthy that the respondent had never questioned paternity before petitioner sought to enforce support provisions for the child.

Not at the birth of the child in January of 1963 -- not at the time of the contract of separation in November of 1965 -- not at the divorce proceeding in December of 1965 -- but rather -- at all these occasions, the opposite was true.

The respondent made specific reference to the child and provided for support and possible visitation.

The respondent was always the moving party and had every opportunity to deny paternity and did not avail himself of this until six years after the birth of the child and only ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.