State Court

Kartik C. v. Sruti R., 228 A.D.3d 507 (1st Dep’t 2024) (attorney for appellant-mother) (reversing lower court’s decision after custody trial granting father sole decision-making on where the child will attend school, finding a lack of sound and substantial basis in the record for doing so)

Joseph v. Granderson,226 A.D.3d 778, 2024 WL 1545667 (2d Dep’t 2024) (attorney for appellant) (reversing lower court’s dismissal of child support petition for failure to provide an acknowledgment of paternity or order of filiation, finding judicial estoppel where court had previously adjudicated custody).

Mitches-Lewis v. Lewis, 204 A.D.3d 989 (2d Dep’t 2022) (attorney for child) (affirming lower court finding that mother’s husband was estopped from denying paternity of child, where the child justifiably relied on the representation that the man was his father).

Matter of Do’Naisha L. E. B., 176 A.D.3d 804 (2d Dep’t 2019) (attorney for appellant-mother) (reversing lower court’s order of fact-finding and disposition which  had found that the appellant permanently neglected her child and terminating her parental rights, and denying TPR petition). 

Cuccio-Terranova v. Terranova, 174 A.D.3d 528 (2d Dep’t 2019) (attorney for appellant-father) (finding that the lower court erred in its determination to limit the father’s visitation and in an exercise of discretion modifying the lower court’s order of visitation as sought by the father).

Guy v. Weichel, 173 A.D.3d 1028 (2d Dep’t 2019) (attorney for appellant-mother) (reversing on the law the lower court’s award of joint custody and finding that the Supreme Court erred in making its custody determination without holding an evidentiary hearing).

Michael K. v. Pamela D.W., 159 A.D.3d 594 (1^st Dep’t 2018) (attorney for respondent-mother) (affirming lower court dismissal after trial of father’s petition for downward modification of his child support obligation).

Schonfeld v. Saucedo, 159 A.D.3d 756 (2d Dep’t 2018) (attorney for appellant-mother) (reversing lower court award of summary judgment and finding that the lower court improperly construed a stipulation of settlement that was clear and unambiguous on its face; finding that the father’s obligation to pay support was not contingent upon whether the mother was allowed visitation with the child).

In re Gurwinder S., 155 A.D.3d 959 (2d Dep’t 2017) (attorney for appellant-child) (reversing lower court’s denial of a petition for issuance of order making specific findings so as to enable subject child to petition the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services for special immigrant juvenile status).

Matter of Emmanuela B., 147 A.D.3d 935 (2d Dep’t 2017) (attorney for appellant-father) (holding that the lower court erred in granting ACS’s application pursuant to Fam. Ct. Act §1027 to remove the child from her father;  the adequacy of the father’s plan to care for the child did not amount to an imminent risk to the child’s life or health that could not be mitigated by reasonable efforts to avoid removal).

Leonardo v. Meyers, 134 A.D.3d 714 (2d Dep’t 2015) (attorney for appellant) (reversing lower court dismissal of family offense petition, finding that petitioner established that respondent committed aggravated harassment in the second degree, which does not require a course of conduct, and remitting for a dispositional hearing).

In re Nialani T., 125 A.D.3d 672 (2d Dep’t 2015) (attorney for appellant-mother) (reversing lower court finding of neglect, finding that ACS failed to establish the existence of a causal connection between the mother’s mental illness and actual or potential harm to the subject child).

Archibald M. v. Georgette S., 110 A.D.3d 811 (2d Dep’t 2013) (attorney for appellant-mother) (reversing award of custody to father and remanding for a hearing before a different judge in light of certain statements made by the Family Court prior to granting the father’s petition and the Family Court’s demand that the mother make an offer of proof before refusing to allow her to testify in opposition to the father’s petition, all of which gave the appearance of a lack of impartiality).

Welch v. Taylor, 115 A.D.3d 754 (2d Dep’t 2014) (attorney for respondent-mother) (affirming award of sole legal and physical custody to respondent; reversing lower court order, consistent with respondent’s position, requiring the respondent monitor the appellant’s compliance with drug treatment and finding that a court may not order that a parent undergo counseling or treatment as a condition of future visitation or reapplication for visitation rights, but may only direct a party to submit to counseling or treatment as a component of visitation).

Kalantarov v. Kalantarova, 109 A.D.3d 471 (2d Dep’t 2013) (attorney for respondent-mother) (affirming lower court’s dismissal of father’s visitation petition and finding that the Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the father’s application for leave to appear in court telephonically).

Samuel S. v. Dayawathie R., 63 A.D.3d 746 (2d Dep’t 2009) (attorney for respondent-mother) (affirming lower court decision awarding custody to respondent and denying visitation to father, where the father had committed family offenses, emotionally and sexually abused the respondent, abducted the child’s older siblings, and intentionally exposed the child to graphic, sexually-explicit materials).

Nicholas v. Nicholas, 107 A.D.3d 899 (2d Dep’t 2013) (attorney for children) (affirming lower court decision awarding the children more time with their father in light of their notable maturity and legitimate reasons for their preference).

Corrigan v. Orosco, 84 A.D.3d 955, (2d Dep’t 2011) (attorney for amicus curiae Child Welfare Organizing Project) (finding that Family Court improvidently exercised its discretion in a custody proceeding by directing the Department of Social Services to perform a court-ordered investigation to determine whether an abuse or neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10 was warranted, where there was “absolutely no indication of abuse, neglect or maltreatment”).

Federal Court

 Nicholson v. Williams, 205 F.R.D. 92 (E.D.N.Y. 2001) (attorney for plaintiff class of battered mothers) (certifying class action, after two months of evidentiary hearings with supporting testimony from scores of witnesses and hundreds of documents lending substantial support to plaintiffs’ claims).

Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F. Supp. 2d 153 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (attorney for plaintiff class of battered mothers) (after two-month trial, finding that the practices and policies of the NYC Administration for Children’s Services in cases involving domestic violence violated both the substantive and procedural due process rights of mothers and children not to be separated by the government unless the parent is unfit).

In re Nicholson, 181 F. Supp. 2d 182 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (attorney for plaintiff class of battered mothers) (preliminary injunction prohibiting NYC Administration for Children’s Services from separating mothers from children solely or primarily on the grounds that the mothers are victims of domestic violence).

Nicholson v. Williams, 294 F. Supp. 2d 369 (E.D.N.Y. 2003) (attorney for plaintiff class of battered mothers) (extending preliminary injunction prohibiting NYC Administration for Children’s Services from separating mothers from children solely or primarily on the grounds that the mothers are victims of domestic violence).

Nicholson v. Scoppetta, 344 F.3d 154 (2d Cir. 2003) (attorney for plaintiff class of battered mothers on appeal by NYC Administration for Children’s Services) (declining to overrule district court decision after trial that NYC Administration for Children’s Services had a pattern and practice of policies in cases involving domestic violence, and certifying questions of state law to the New York Court Appeals).

Justin R. ex rel. O’Toole v. Niang, No. 06 CIV. 6228 BSJ RLE, 2010 WL 7891579 (S.D.N.Y. July 20, 2010) (attorney for plaintiff-child)  (after trial, awarding damages to child for abuse in foster care).

Morett v. Gonzales, 190 F. App’x 47, 48 (2d Cir. 2006) (attorney for appellant) (on petition for asylum, vacating order to remove appellant from the United States and remanding case, finding that unlawful immigrant’s sexual assault, harassment and extortion by several police officers in his county of original on account of his sexual orientation was severe and rose to the level of persecution required for asylum).

Dunn v. N.Y. State Dep’t of Labor, No. 73 CIV. 1656 (KTD), 1994 WL 48799 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 16, 1994) (attorney for plaintiffs) (imposing order on NYS Department of Labor to ensure the timeliness of appeals of denials of unemployment insurance).