H.M. v. E.T.

76 A.D.3d 528 (2010)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P, a Canadian citizen, and the biological mother of the child filed a petition seeking to obtain child support from d, her former same-sex partner with whom she allegedly agreed to conceive a child through artificial insemination by donor and upon whose promise of support she allegedly relied in so conceiving the child. By opinion dated May 4, 2010, the Court of Appeals reversed the determination that the Family Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, and remitted the matter to this Court for consideration of the question, raised but not determined upon appeal to this Court, of whether P's petition sufficiently states a cause of action for child support pursuant to Family Court Act. P's petition seeks an order of support predicated upon a determination, through the application of the doctrines of equitable estoppel and implied contract, that D is chargeable with the support of the subject child.