Challenging the Forensic Psychiatrist's Report

For example, courts have rejected neutral expert testimony they have found unpersuasive in favor of other experts who testified in the case. In State ex rel. H.K. v. M.S. 187A.D.2d50, 592 N.Y.S.2d708 (1st Dept 1993) the First Department rejected various expert testimony it determined to be not credible. There, the parties had agreed on joint custody, the mother having physical custody and the father exercising daily visitation. Due to circumstances not relevant here, the parties ended up in a custody dispute that resulted in a long trial. In affirming an award of sole custody to the mother, the appellate court noted that the trial court was free to reject the recommendation of the court-appointed neutral expert, as well as experts who testified on the father's behalf, and credit the mother's experts. The court, in determining that the mother was a more fit parent, noted that the expert testimony rejected by the court was “seriously undermined on cross examination.” See also, Merl v. Merl, 128 A.D.2d 685, 513 N.Y.S.2d 184 (2d Dept. 1987) (court rejected court-appointed expert's recommendation with regard to custody in favor of the recommendation of the psychiatrist for one of the parties who had treated both parties and their child, to various degrees, for 8 years).