Matter of Odunbaku v Odunbaku, Court of Appeals November 18, 2016
Matter of Odunbaku v Odunbaku, Court of Appeals November 18, 2016
...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."
By Lee Rosenberg | Published November 22, 2016 | Posted in Blog: Divorce New York Style | Leave a comment