Opinion
2014-06-4
In the Matter of Sadna TULSHI, appellant, v. Omesh TULSHI, respondent.
Rhea G. Friedman, New York, N.Y., for appellant.
In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Ramirez, J.), dated March 1, 2013, which, after a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The allegations in a family offense proceeding must be “supported by a fair preponderance of the evidence” (Family Ct. Act § 832; see Matter of Jarrett v. Jarrett, 102 A.D.3d 695, 956 N.Y.S.2d 898;Matter of Scanziani v. Hairston, 100 A.D.3d 1007, 955 N.Y.S.2d 162;Matter of Daoud v. Daoud, 92 A.D.3d 878, 940 N.Y.S.2d 869;Matter of Mamantov v. Mamantov, 86 A.D.3d 540, 541, 927 N.Y.S.2d 140). “The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family Court, and the Family Court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal” (Matter of Pearlman v. Pearlman, 78 A.D.3d 711, 712, 911 N.Y.S.2d 87 [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of Creighton v. Whitmore, 71 A.D.3d 1141, 898 N.Y.S.2d 585;Matter of Gray v. Gray, 55 A.D.3d 909, 867 N.Y.S.2d 110;Matter of Rankoth v. Sloan, 44 A.D.3d 863, 863–864, 844 N.Y.S.2d 357;Matter of Charles v. Charles, 21 A.D.3d 487, 799 N.Y.S.2d 822). The Family Court's credibility determinations will not be disturbed if supported by the record ( see Matter of Richardson v. Richardson, 80 A.D.3d 32, 43–44, 910 N.Y.S.2d 149;Matter of Luke v. Luke, 72 A.D.3d 689, 689, 897 N.Y.S.2d 655;Matter of Barnes v. Barnes, 54 A.D.3d 755, 755, 863 N.Y.S.2d 758;Matter of Belgrave v. Mingo, 28 A.D.3d 479, 479, 811 N.Y.S.2d 579).
Here, the mother filed a family offense petition alleging, inter alia, that the father had committed the family offenses of disorderly conduct, harassment, and assault. The determination of the Family Court that the mother failed to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the father committed a family offense hinged on issues of credibility, and is supported by the record ( see Matter of Velazquez v. Haffey, 113 A.D.3d 783, 978 N.Y.S.2d 861;Matter of Khan v. Khan, 112 A.D.3d 829, 976 N.Y.S.2d 671;Matter of Chavez–Gonzalez v. Tran, 107 A.D.3d 983, 966 N.Y.S.2d 877;Matter of Howell v. Howell, 105 A.D.3d 847, 847, 961 N.Y.S.2d 805). Accordingly, we find no basis to disturb the Family Court's determination denying the petition and dismissing the proceeding. MASTRO, J.P., LEVENTHAL, CHAMBERS and AUSTIN, JJ., concur.