From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Pena

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 26, 2011
83 A.D.3d 1062 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

Nos. 2010-03552 (Docket Nos. V-00388-09, V-00389-09, V-00390-09, V-00391-09).

April 26, 2011.

In related child custody proceedings, the father appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an amended order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (IDV Part) (St. George, J.), entered March 12, 2010, as, after a hearing, granted the mother's petition for sole custody of the parties' two children and, in effect, denied his petition for sole custody of the children and to relocate with the children to Putnam County.

Thomas T. Keating, White Plains, N.Y. (Joseph M. Angiolillo of counsel), for appellant.

Albanese Albanese, LLP, Garden City, N.Y. (Robert A. Carpentier and Barry A. Oster of counsel), for respondent.

Joseph P. Abbenda, Glen Cove, N.Y., attorney for the child.

Before: Dillon, J.P., Florio, Chambers and Miller, JJ.


Ordered that the amended order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court properly awarded the mother sole custody of the parties' two children. In making a custody determination, the paramount consideration is the best interests of the child ( see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167; Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 NY2d 89). Since the Supreme Court's determination is largely dependent upon an assessment of the credibility of witnesses and upon the character, temperament, and sincerity of the parents, its determination should not be disturbed unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record ( see Attain v Alain, 35 AD3d 513, 513-514). Here, the Supreme Court's determination to award the mother sole custody of the children has a sound and substantial basis in the record. That determination was supported by, among other things, the evaluation of the court-appointed forensic evaluator ( see Nicholas T. v Christine T., 42 AD3d 526, 527; Gorelik v Gorelik, 303 AD2d 553, 554).

The father's remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

In re Pena

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 26, 2011
83 A.D.3d 1062 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

In re Pena

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of GEORGE CAVALLERO, Appellant, v. MARIA PENA, Respondent…

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

Date published: Apr 26, 2011

Citations

83 A.D.3d 1062 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 3597
921 N.Y.S.2d 531

Citing Cases

In re Peoples

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. "In making a custody determination, the…

Julian B. v. Williams

. Wills, 73 A.D.3d 777, 777, 899 N.Y.S.2d 669;see Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 171, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658,…