Majority
“The paramount concern in applying equitable estoppel in paternity cases is the best interests of the subject child[ren]” (Matter of Leonardo Antonio V. v Estate of Joanna B., 82 AD3d 1253 , 1254 [2011]; see Matter of Shondel J. v Mark D., 7 NY3d 320 , 326 [2006]; Matter of Juan A. v Rosemarie N., 55 AD3d 827 , 827-828 [2008]). “Since the Family Court was presented with sufficient information to make a determination as to the subject child[ren]’s best interests, the Family Court properly granted the . . . petition on the ground of equitable estoppel without conducting a hearing” (Matter of Leonardo Antonio V. v Estate of Joanna B., 82 AD3d at 1254 ; see Matter of Maurice T. v Mark P., 23 AD3d 567 [2005]; Matter of Griffin v Marshall, 294 AD2d 438 , 439 [2002]). Furthermore, the Family Court possessed sufficient information to render, without a hearing, an informed visitation determination consistent with the best interests of the children (see Matter of Perez v Sepulveda, 60 AD3d 1072 , 1073 [2009]; Matter of Perez v Sepulveda, 51 AD3d 673 , 673-674 [2008]; Matter of Hom v Zullo, 6 AD3d 536 [2004]). Skelos, J.E, Belen, Lott and Cohen, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Shondel J. v. Mark D. 7 NY3d 320 at 326 p. 1054
- Juan A. v. Rosemarie N. 55 AD3d 827 at 827-828 p. 1054
- Griffin v. Marshall 294 AD2d 438 at 439 p. 1054
- Perez v. Sepulveda 60 AD3d 1072 at 1073 p. 1054
- Perez v. Sepulveda 51 AD3d 673 at 673-674 p. 1054