Administration for Children's Servs. v Sanford

Administration for Children's Servs. v Sanford 2009 NY Slip Op 09147 [68 AD3d 495] December 10, 2009 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Administration for Children's Services, on Behalf of Vicki Steadman, Respondent,
v
West Sanford, Appellant.

—[*1] Kenneth M. Tuccillo, Hastings-On-Hudson, for appellant.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Ellen Ravitch of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Family Court, New York County (Lori Sattler, J.), entered on or about May 28, 2008, which denied respondent putative father's objections to the Support Magistrate's order denying his motion to vacate the underlying order of support, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, the objections granted, and the support order vacated.

The parties do not dispute that the mother, having given up custody of her child, had no child-support rights to assign to petitioner, and the latter thus lacked standing to bring this action (see James McKinney & Son v Lake Placid 1980 Olympic Games, 61 NY2d 836 [1984]; National Fin. Co. v Uh, 279 AD2d 374 [2001]). Respondent asserted the defense of lack of standing in a motion to vacate the support order made within days of being assigned counsel in 2006. Prior to that, in 2001 and 2004, he had written letters to the Magistrate advising that the mother did not have custody and that her application for support was thus improper and illegal, but these letters were disregarded as improper in form. Under these circumstances, we find pro se respondent's letters constituted applications within the meaning of Family Court Act § 451. Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, McGuire, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.