Articles

Profile of the Hon. Guy Patrick DePhillips

By Michael Goldsmith

Second generation Judge Guy Patrick DePhillips of the Queens County Family Court is a hard working judge with wide and varied interests, and 30 years of experience in the Court System.

Judge DePhillips grew up in Greenwich Village. His father, Judge Arthur DePhillips, was a Municipal Court, and later Civil Court Judge. "I remember when my father walked down the street, people would tip their hat to show respect for his position. I thought that there was nothing greater. How did I know that society would change?" said Judge DePhillips.

Judge DePhillips received his B.A. (Cum Laude) from Manhattan College in 1959, and his L.L.B. from St. John's University three years later. While a member of the S.J.U. Law Review, Judge DePhillips published an article entitled, "Criminal Law - Grand Jury - Inquiry Through Media of Simple Questionnaire." In 1965, the future jurist was awarded his L.L.M. from New York University.

After his graduation from law school, the young attorney was associated with Pross, Smith, Halpern & Lefevre until his appointment as a Law Assistant at the Supreme Court in 1968. In 1972, the future judge was appointed Law Secretary to Supreme Court Justice Vincent Lupiano, and served in that capacity upon Justice Lupiano's ascension to the Appellate Division, First Department in 1974.

Justice Lupiano passed away in September, 1982. Judge DePhillips' title then changed to Appellate Law Assistant serving in the Appellate Division Departmental Disciplinary Committee. In actuality, he was still working on appeals, and shortly thereafter, Judge DePhillips was appointed Principal Appellate Law Assistant at the Appellate Division, First Department.

On February 17, 1983, Judge DePhillips was appointed Family Court Judge by Mayor Edward Koch. He was re-appointed by Mayor David Dinkens.

Judge DePhillips, as a former law secretary, enjoys legal research and writing. Recent published opinions include:

Carmille A., Petitioner, v. David A., Respondent, 162 Misc 2d 22 [615 NYS2d 584]. The issue here was whether the Family Court, in light of the 6th Amendment right to trial by jury, can impose a jail sentence of in excess of six months for multiple violations of an order of protection. Judge DePhillips, in order to prevent an offender from partaking in "multiple bites of the apple" held that "two individual contempts committed with respect to one order of protection constituted separate offenses for 6th Amendment purposes, and, therefore, the imposition of consecutive commitments for those contempts in excess of a total period of six months does not invoke any trial relief applicable where the potential sentence for a criminal offense exceeds six months imprisonment."

In the Matter of Charise B., 146 Misc 2d 943. Judge DePhillips held that the Commissioner of Social Services owes a duty of permanency planning for a child, even if the child is placed in foster care with a relative. The Commissioner still has responsibility for the child.

In the Matter of Michael S., 133 Misc 2d 1115. This case concerned the admissibility of polygraph results. Judge DePhillips held that polygraph test results, administered to respondent at his request and without a stipulation between the parties by an examiner of his choosing without prior court approval, is not admissible in a child abuse proceeding.

In the Matter of Alexandra C, and In the Matter of Diamond J., 157 Misc 2d 262, 596 NYS2d 958. These two separate proceedings held that a parent, after a judicial surrender of a child to foster care which explicitly reserved the retention of visitation rights will have standing to petition the Court for visitation post-adoption.

In the Matter of Dale P., 150 Misc 2d 366, 189 AD2d 325, modified, 84 NY 2d 72. Here, the Court of Appeals upheld Judge DePhillip's ruling that the "Family Court may direct the N.Y.C. Commissioner of Social Services to commence a proceeding to terminate parental rights of a child previously found to be abandoned and dependent and directly placed by Family Court with a nonrelative custodian, a "suitable person", under the Family Court Act [citation omitted] notwithstanding that the child has not been properly processed into the official foster care system." The Court of Appeals further held that "... In these circumstances, there is no reason to distinguish a foster child who is not placed by or with a social services agency from one directly placed by the court in a home not certified under applicable State and Federal law."

A review of the above cases clearly indicates that the Family Court deals with very important issues and complex problems. Judge DePhillips regularly stays on the bench well past 5:00 PM, and puts great effort and care into crafting his decisions.

Because of the vital service provided to the community by the Family Court, Judge DePhillips believes very strongly in the proposed merger of the Family Court and the Supreme Court. "Where does the division serve the public good," asked the Judge rhetorically. "Family Court, with its origins in social institutions, is now a genuine court of Law with guarantees of due process. Family Court Judges, along with Housing Court, Criminal Court, Civil Court and Supreme Court Judges are eligible for appointment to the Court of Appeals. There should not be the appearance of two classes of Justice, one for the rich and one for the poor, with Family Court being for the indigent."

"Opponents to the merger," continued Judge DePhillips, "argue that Family Court judges are appointed, and not elected, and that Family Court is a specialized court, and should be left alone. This is an articulation of form and not substance. It was always intended that the Supreme Court, as a court of original jurisdiction, should have all the powers of Family Court. That means that a Supreme Court Justice has all the powers of a Family Court Judge." "If so," asked the Judge, "why does the Supreme Court not handle family matters? This is not efficient."

When Judge DePhillips takes off his judicial robe, he enjoys a vast array of hobbies. "I was once rated an expert in chess," said the Judge. However, I did not have time for both, so I chose law, and now collect chess sets."

Judge DePhillips also enjoys music, and collects records and CDs. His tastes range from classical to classic rock. His favorites include the Beatles and Jefferson Airplane ("Not Jefferson Starship!"). The Judge enjoys jazz, but does not collect jazz recordings, because he "does not want to go bankrupt." Judge DePhillips is also a patron of Broadway and Off-Broadway theater.

Judge DePhillips is also a history buff, with a strong interest in the Civil War. He has visited many battle sites, especially Antietam, "where the Union could have won the war in 1862, if only General McClellan had sent in his reserves or pressed his advantage. Ultimately, in the bloodiest single day in U.S. history, the Union Army earned tactical victory by turning back General Lee's first invasion of the North, and provided President Lincoln the political cover to issue the Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves, and checked England and France intervening on behalf of the Confederates."

Judge DePhillips, besides being a prolific opinion writer, enjoys other forms of literature. While at St. John's he watched the performance of his award winning play about the trial of Joan of Arc. He also belongs to a social group of writers of fantasy and science fiction. His own personal favorites in this genre include Ray Bradbury, C.S. Lewis and H.P. Lovecraft.