From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Clarke v. Clarke

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 23, 1986
124 A.D.2d 379 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

October 23, 1986

Appeal from the Family Court of Broome County (Dickinson, Jr., J.).


A review of the record reveals that Family Court properly determined that New Hampshire is a more appropriate forum for the instant custody modification proceeding (see, Domestic Relations Law § 75-h). The home State of the parties' child since 1981 has been New Hampshire and evidence concerning the child's care, training and personal relationships is more readily available there (see, Domestic Relations Law § 75-h; Singer v Singer, 79 A.D.2d 680). In the unlikely event that the Superior Court in New Hampshire should again decline to take jurisdiction of this custody matter, either party may move to reinstate this proceeding (see, Domestic Relations Law § 75-h). The order should be affirmed.

Order affirmed, without costs. Kane, J.P., Main, Casey, Mikoll and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Clarke v. Clarke

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 23, 1986
124 A.D.2d 379 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Matter of Clarke v. Clarke

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of WILLIAM J. CLARKE, Appellant, v. JACQUELINE CLARKE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Oct 23, 1986

Citations

124 A.D.2d 379 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

Swain v. Vogt

Moreover, respondent has always had sole custody of Brandon and averred that he has adjusted well in Maine…