Opinion
April 1, 1996
Appeal from the Family Court, Kings County (Martinez-Perez, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Custody matters are within the sound discretion of the Family Court, and its findings should be accorded great deference on appeal since that court was in the best position to evaluate the testimony, character, and sincerity of the parties ( see, Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 173-174; Matter of Takeo Kaji v. Li Hwa Chen, 224 A.D.2d 423; Carlin v. Carlin, 217 A.D.2d 679; Klat v. Klat, 176 A.D.2d 922, 923; cf., Matter of Salvati v Salvati, 221 A.D.2d 541). Thus, the Family Court's custody determination should not be disturbed unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record ( see, Matter of Takeo Kaji v. Li Hwa Chen, supra; Igbal v. Igbal, 214 A.D.2d 702; Matter of Guillermo v. New York City Commr. of Social Servs., 210 A.D.2d 416; Klat v. Klat, supra, at 923).
We find no basis to disturb the Family Court's custody determination in this case. The record supports the Family Court's finding that it is in the best interests of the children for their father to have custody of them ( see, Eschbach v Eschbach, supra, at 171; Matter of Takeo Kaji v. Li Hwa Chen, supra; Matter of Gago v. Acevedo, 214 A.D.2d 565, 566; see also, Matter of Salvati v. Salvati, supra). Balletta, J.P., Sullivan, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.