Etuk v. Etuk

In Etuk v. Etuk, 300 A.D.2d 483 (2d Dep't 2002), the father served his objections on the attorney who appeared for the mother before the support magistrate, but did not serve them on the mother herself. The Family Court held that the father's failure to serve the objections on the "opposing party" directly rendered the Court without jurisdiction to entertain them. The Appellate Division reversed. It reasoned that, since N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act 439(e) does not address the issue whether service on the attorney of a represented party constitutes service on the "opposing party," the provisions of the Civil Practice Law and Rules come into play. See Fam. Ct. Act 165(a).