Opinion
152 CAF 19-01287
02-07-2020
In the Matter of Jennifer LESINSKI, Petitioner–Respondent, v. Jason CIAMAGA, Respondent–Appellant. In the Matter of Jason Ciamaga, Petitioner–Appellant, v. Jennifer Lesinski, Respondent–Respondent.
GAUGHAN & FRIEDMAN ATTORNEYS, HAMBURG (R.J. FRIEDMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT–APPELLANT AND PETITIONER–APPELLANT. WYOMING COUNTY–LEGAL AID BUREAU, WARSAW (MARK A. ADRIAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER–RESPONDENT AND RESPONDENT–RESPONDENT. JOHN F. WHITING, LEROY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN.
GAUGHAN & FRIEDMAN ATTORNEYS, HAMBURG (R.J. FRIEDMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT–APPELLANT AND PETITIONER–APPELLANT.
WYOMING COUNTY–LEGAL AID BUREAU, WARSAW (MARK A. ADRIAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER–RESPONDENT AND RESPONDENT–RESPONDENT.
JOHN F. WHITING, LEROY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CURRAN, TROUTMAN, WINSLOW, AND BANNISTER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: In this custody proceeding pursuant to article 6 of the Family Court Act, respondent-petitioner father appeals from an order that, inter alia, granted the father and petitioner-respondent mother joint custody of their two children with primary physical residence with the mother. The father contends that Family Court's determination is not in the children's best interests and that he should be awarded sole custody of the children or, alternatively, that he should be awarded primary physical custody. We reject that contention. "The court's determination in a custody matter is entitled to great deference and will not be disturbed where, as here, it is based on a careful weighing of appropriate factors" ( Matter of Stevenson v. Smith, 145 A.D.3d 1598, 1598, 43 N.Y.S.3d 832 [4th Dept. 2016] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see generally Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 172–174, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260 [1982] ). Contrary to the father's further contention that the court improperly relied on allegations that were not substantiated during the custody hearing, we conclude that the court's determination is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the hearing record (see generally Matter of Cross v. Caswell, 113 A.D.3d 1107, 1107, 977 N.Y.S.2d 853 [4th Dept. 2014] ).