Contact an Attorney Now

In order to help you more quickly, please fill out the quick form and submit or call512.448.4330. A representative of the firm will call you ASAP.

Oops! We could not locate your form.

Matter of Odunbaku v Odunbaku, Court of Appeals November 18, 2016

Matter of Odunbaku v Odunbaku, Court of Appeals November 18, 2016

Court of Appeals reverses Second Department: Matter of Odunbaku v Odunbaku,
http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2016/2016_07705.htm
"We apply our precedent in Matter of Bianca v Frank (43 NY2d 168 [1977]) to Family Court Act § 439 (e) and hold that if a party is represented by counsel, the time requirements set out in the statute for objections to a support magistrate's final order, when the order is served by mail, do not begin to run until the order is mailed to counsel.

...Notably, mailing court orders to the parties without also mailing the orders to their attorneys impairs effective access to justice on the part of vulnerable individuals and undermines their representation. Indeed, the practice deprives the party of some of the principal benefits of being represented by an attorney.We hold, therefore, pursuant to Bianca, that if a party is represented by counsel, the 35-day time requirement set out in Family Court Act § 439 (e) does not begin to run until the final order is mailed to counsel."

www.divorcenewyorkstyle.com

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*