Preview:

[*1]


Decided on April 21, 2006
Family Court, Kings County

P-08381-01
Ann E. O'Shea, J.
This matter is presently before the court on remand from the Appellate Division, Second Department, to determine, after a hearing, if a formal, legal determination as to whether petitioner's father, the respondent herein, is also Quymell's father "will cause Quymell to suffer irreparable loss of status, destruction of his family image, or other harm to his physical or emotional well being" (Ruth W. v Lewis F., 11 AD3d 627, 628). Having heard the testimony of the witnesses and considered the report of the forensic evaluator and the arguments of counsel, and having held an in camera meeting with Quymell, the court issues its decision with regard to that issue.
Procedural History
On September 25, 2001, Ruth W. filed a paternity petition alleging that her father, respondent Lewis F., is also the father of her son Quymell.[FN1] Ruth W. sought DNA tests and the court's official declaration that Lewis F. is Quymell's father, as well as an order of child support. The parties appeared before the court in January 2002 and the court ordered the Administration for Children's Services ("ACS") to conduct an investigation of the allegations in the petition and of the children's living conditions. ACS submitted an initial report, dated April 4, 2002, which related Ruth W.'s assertions that her father had begun sexually abusing her when she was about nine years old and that the abuse continued into her adulthood, including during the period when Quymell was conceived and born.[FN2] ACS also reported that Lewis F. admitted to having a sexual [*2]relationship with his daughter but claimed that such relationship did not begin until Ruth W. was in her 20s and addicted to crack. According to Lewis F., he gave Ruth W. money for drugs in exchange for sex. Lewis F. did not deny the possibility that he was Quymell's father. The report additionally indicated that Quymell had some idea that his grandfather might also be his father.
On June 14, 2002, Family Court Judge Rachel Adams, the judge then presiding over this matter,[FN3] dismissed the petition based upon her conclusion that it would be against public policy to grant the petition thereby declaring to the parties, to Quymell, and to the world at large, by court order, that Quymell is the product of an incestuous relationship between his mother and his grandfather. In July 2002, Ruth W. filed a Notice of Appeal of the dismissal and simultaneously moved for reargument before Judge Adams.
On November 19, 2002, while the appeal was pending, Judge Adams granted the motion for reargument and reinstated the paternity petition with respect to Quymell. Judge Adams held that a hearing was required to determine whether a declaration of paternity would be in Quymell's best interest and ordered a forensic evaluation to aid in that determination. Ruth W. appealed the November 19, 2002, order. In the meantime, an initial, "interim" report dated July 17, 2003, and a "supplemental" report dated December 12, 2003, were submitted by the forensic evaluator, Dr. Mark Rand..
On January 6, 2004, while the matter was still pending in the Appellate Division, Judge Adams ordered that petitioner, respondent, and Quymell undergo genetic testing based upon a determination that none of the statutory exceptions in Family Court Act ("FCA")

Download 2006_51520.pdf

New York Law