From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Segovia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 2, 2011
85 A.D.3d 1267 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

No. 510941.

June 2, 2011.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Montgomery County (Cortese, J.), entered August 31, 2010, which, among other things, granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to Domestic Relations Law article 5-A, to enforce a prior order of custody and visitation entered in Texas.

Cynthia Feathers, Saratoga Springs, for appellant.

Mitch S. Kessler, Cohoes, attorney for the children.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Lahtinen, Kavanagh and McCarthy, JJ.


Respondent, the mother of two sons (born in 1999 and 2002), refused to release the children to the paternal grandparents for visitation and instead brought them to New York from Texas. A Texas court thereafter issued a temporary order granting custody to the father and petitioner, the paternal grandmother. Petitioner then commenced this proceeding seeking registration and enforcement of the Texas order ( see Domestic Relations Law §§ 77-d, 77-g). Respondent did not contest registration of the Texas order, but requested that Family Court exercise temporary emergency jurisdiction based on her allegations that the paternal grandparents had sexually abused the children ( see Domestic Relations Law § 76-c). Family Court placed the children in the temporary custody of the Montgomery County Department of Social Services and ordered an investigation into respondent's allegations. Upon conclusion of the investigation, Family Court found the allegations to be unfounded and granted enforcement of the Texas order.

On her appeal, respondent contends that Family Court did not conduct an adequate investigation into her allegations prior to its determination. This claim, however, is not supported by the record. Family Court heard, without objection, testimony that the children met with a local sexual abuse validator who determined that there was no sexual abuse, and it reviewed an investigative report prepared by authorities in Texas after respondent made the same allegations there. The Texas authorities conducted an exhaustive review and found no evidence to substantiate the allegations of sexual abuse. In light of the information rebutting respondent's claims, we agree with Family Court that her unsubstantiated allegations were insufficient to warrant the invocation of temporary emergency jurisdiction ( see Matter of Hearne v Hearne, 61 AD3d 758, 759; Matter of Randall v Randall, 305 AD2d 512, 513).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

In re Segovia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 2, 2011
85 A.D.3d 1267 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

In re Segovia

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MARY ROSE SEGOVIA, Respondent, v. COLLEEN BUSHNELL…

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

Date published: Jun 2, 2011

Citations

85 A.D.3d 1267 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 4576
925 N.Y.S.2d 220

Citing Cases

Chester HH. v. Angela GG.

Family Court erred in relying on the unsigned and redacted MDHHS report, containing vague and contradictory…

Bretzinger v. Hatcher

We agree with the mother that the court erred in denying her motion to dismiss the petition. Texas had…