NEW YORK’S HIGHEST COURT RULES CHILDREN CAN INDEPENDENTLY APPEAL CUSTODY DECISIONS THROUGH THEIR ATTORNEYS WITHOUT PARENTAL SUPPORT. (PHOTO).

New York’s highest court rules children can independently appeal custody decisions through their attorneys without parental support

 The New York Court of Appeals has ruled that children may appeal custody decisions in family court even without parental backing, resolving a split among lower appellate courts across the state. In a unanimous decision issued Thursday, Judge Madeline Singas wrote that state law “clearly authorizes” an attorney for the child to file such appeals, even when neither parent chooses to do so. She noted that while children are not full parties to custody proceedings, the Family Court Act still permits their appointed attorneys to act on their behalf in pursuing appeals, provided the child has standing as an “aggrieved” party.

The ruling reverses precedent from the state’s Fourth Department, which had held that children in custody disputes could not independently appeal unless a parent also participated. Other appellate divisions — including those covering New York City, Long Island, and upstate regions — had already recognized the authority of attorneys for children to pursue appeals, creating inconsistent standards across the state. The underlying case involved a custody dispute between the parents of four children, in which the father successfully sought to modify a custody arrangement. Although the children’s attorney appealed the decision to maintain primary residence with the mother, the appeal was initially dismissed under Fourth Department precedent, despite support from the mother.

The Court of Appeals concluded that denying such appeals would render key provisions of the Family Court Act ineffective and established a uniform statewide rule allowing attorneys for children to pursue custody appeals. The decision is expected to have its greatest impact in regions previously governed by the Fourth Department’s stricter interpretation. A lawyer involved in the case said the ruling ensures children are no longer treated differently depending on where they live in the state.