Opinion
2016–10709 Docket Nos. V–12721–13, V–12722–13, V–28525–12, V–28526–12
10-10-2018
In the Matter of George LEON, respondent, v. Melissa QUINONES, appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Melissa Quinones, appellant, v. George Leon, respondent (Proceeding No. 2)
Richard L. Herzfeld, New York, NY, for appellant. Yasmin Daley Duncan, Brooklyn, NY, for respondent. Karen P. Simmons, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Lee D. Tarr and Janet Neustaetter of counsel), attorney for the children.
Richard L. Herzfeld, New York, NY, for appellant.
Yasmin Daley Duncan, Brooklyn, NY, for respondent.
Karen P. Simmons, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Lee D. Tarr and Janet Neustaetter of counsel), attorney for the children.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., SANDRA L. SGROI, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In related proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Lisa Aschkenasy, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated September 29, 2016. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a fact-finding hearing, granted the father's petition for sole legal and residential custody of the parties' children and, in effect, denied the mother's amended petition for sole legal and residential custody of the children and permission to relocate.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The father and the mother are the parents of two children, and each separately petitioned for custody of the children. In addition, the mother sought permission to relocate with the children to Massachusetts. After an extensive fact-finding hearing that included the testimony of both parents and the father's long-term partner, the Family Court, inter alia, awarded sole legal and residential custody to the father, and, in effect, denied the mother's amended petition. The mother appeals.
The court's paramount concern in any custody dispute is to determine, under the totality of the circumstances, what is in the best interests of the child (see Eschbach v. Eschbach , 56 N.Y.2d 167, 171, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260 ; Matter of Gooler v. Gooler , 107 A.D.3d 712, 966 N.Y.S.2d 208 ; Matter of Julie v. Wills , 73 A.D.3d 777, 899 N.Y.S.2d 669 ). In determining an initial petition for child custody, the court must consider, among other things, "(1) which alternative will best promote stability; (2) the available home environments; (3) the past performance of each parent; (4) each parent's relative fitness, including his or her ability to guide the child, provide for the child's overall well being, and foster the child's relationship with the noncustodial parent; and (5) the child's desires" ( Matter of Supangkat v. Torres , 101 A.D.3d 889, 890, 954 N.Y.S.2d 915 ; see Matter of Davis v. Delena , 159 A.D.3d 900, 901, 70 N.Y.S.3d 82 ; Matter of Swinson v. Brewington , 84 A.D.3d 1251, 1253, 925 N.Y.S.2d 96 ). Custody determinations depend to a great extent upon an assessment of the character and credibility of the parties and witnesses, and therefore, deference is accorded to the trial court's findings in this regard (see Matter of Cretella v. Stephens , 160 A.D.3d 846, 847, 74 N.Y.S.3d 84 ; Matter of Gooler v. Gooler , 107 A.D.3d at 712, 966 N.Y.S.2d 208 ). Such findings will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Gooler v. Gooler , 107 A.D.3d at 712, 966 N.Y.S.2d 208 ; see also Matter of Frankiv v. Kalitka , 105 A.D.3d 1045, 1046, 963 N.Y.S.2d 393 ).
The Family Court's determination that the children's best interests would be served by awarding sole legal and residential custody to the father has a sound and substantial basis in the record, and therefore, will not be disturbed (see Matter of Gooler v. Gooler , 107 A.D.3d at 712, 966 N.Y.S.2d 208 ; Matter of Gasby v. Chung , 88 A.D.3d 709, 709–710, 930 N.Y.S.2d 471 ; Matter of Quinones v. Gonzalez , 79 A.D.3d 893, 894, 912 N.Y.S.2d 432 ). Accordingly, we affirm the order insofar as appealed from.
MASTRO, J.P., SGROI, MALTESE and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.