Opinion
12-21-2016
In the Matter of ANISE C. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent; Angelica C. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Adian S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent; Angelica C. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Alyssa C.-S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner; Angelica C. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3).
Lewis S. Calderon, Jamaica, N.Y., for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Susan Greenberg and Antonella Karlin of counsel), for respondent. Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Amy Hausknecht of counsel), attorney for the children.
Lewis S. Calderon, Jamaica, N.Y., for appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Susan Greenberg and Antonella Karlin of counsel), for respondent.
Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Amy Hausknecht of counsel), attorney for the children.
Appeals by the mother from two orders of the Family Court, Kings County (Lillian Wan, J.), both dated March 19, 2015. The orders, in two related proceedings, after a hearing, granted the petitioner's motion to suspend the mother's visitation with the subject children pending further order of the Family Court.ORDERED that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Following findings of abuse against the mother as to two children and neglect as to one child, the mother was awarded supervised visitation with the children. Thereafter, the petitioner, the Administration for Children's Services, moved to suspend the mother's visitation following her hostile and violent behavior against the children during their visits in December 2014. The Family Court, after a hearing, granted the motion and indefinitely suspended the mother's visitation. The mother appeals. We affirm.
A parent's visitation, even if supervised, should not be suspended unless there is substantial evidence that the visitation would be detrimental to the welfare of the child (see Matter of Matthew Donald R., 46 A.D.3d 909, 847 N.Y.S.2d 864 ; Klutchko v. Baron, 1 A.D.3d 400, 405, 768 N.Y.S.2d 217 ; Matter of Chiofalo v. Bertolino, 233 A.D.2d 440, 650 N.Y.S.2d 605 ). The determination to suspend a parent's visitation is within the sound discretion of the trial court based upon the best interests of the child, and its determination will not be set aside unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Brianna B. [Jennifer I.], 138 A.D.3d 832, 30 N.Y.S.3d 191 ). Contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court's finding that there was substantial evidence that visitation would be detrimental or harmful to the children's welfare and contrary to their best interests, has a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Brianna B. [Jennifer I.], 138 A.D.3d at 832, 30 N.Y.S.3d 191 ; Matter of Waldman v. Waldman, 47 A.D.3d 637, 849 N.Y.S.2d 590 ; Matter of Licitra v. Licitra, 255 A.D.2d 384, 679 N.Y.S.2d 700 ; Matter of Chiofalo v. Bertolino, 233 A.D.2d at 441, 650 N.Y.S.2d 605 ; Matter of Ashley S., 129 A.D.2d 581, 514 N.Y.S.2d 80 ). Accordingly, the Family Court's granting of the petitioner's motion to suspend the mother's visitation will not be disturbed.
BALKIN, J.P., DICKERSON, LaSALLE and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.