Opinion
2001-03946
Argued June 18, 2002
August 12, 2002
In child custody proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Bivona, J.), entered March 14, 2001, which, inter alia, awarded sole custody of the parties' two children to the mother, directed that he remain 1000 feet away from the children's home and school, and directed that he have supervised and therapeutic visitation.
Grimes Zimet, New York, N.Y. (John J. Grimes and Barbara T.R. Zimet of counsel), for appellant.
Richard Cardinale, Brooklyn, N.Y., for respondent.
Todd D. Kadish, Brooklyn, N.Y., Law Guardian for the children.
Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
In adjudicating issues regarding custody and visitation rights, the most important factor to be considered is the best interest of the children (see Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167). In determining the best interest of the children, the courts must view the "totality of [the] circumstances" (Friederwitzer v. Friederwitzer, 55 N.Y.2d 89, 95-96). The court's determination is based to a great extent upon its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses and the character, temperament, and sincerity of the parents, and "the findings of the nisi prius court must be accorded the greatest respect" (Matter of Irene O., 38 N.Y.2d 776, 777; see Eschbach v. Eschbach, supra at 173).
The Family Court weighed the appropriate factors. The record clearly supports its determination as to custody, visitation, and the granting of a protective order.
RITTER, J.P., FEUERSTEIN, ADAMS and RIVERA, JJ., concur.