Ammirata v. Ammirata

49 A.D.3d 829, 853 N.Y.2d 902
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 25, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 49 A.D.3d 829 (Ammirata v. Ammirata) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ammirata v. Ammirata, 49 A.D.3d 829, 853 N.Y.2d 902 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

A visitation order may be modified upon a showing of a subsequent change of circumstances and that modification is required (see Family Ct Act § 467 [b] [ii]; Matter of Sullivan v Sullivan, 40 AD3d 865 [2007]; Matter of Manos v Manos, 282 AD2d 749 [2001]). Here, the evidence presented at the hearing warranted increasing the visitation the mother was afforded. The most important factor to be considered in adjudicating visitation rights is the best interests of the children (see Matter of Wilson v McGlinchey, 2 NY3d 375, 381 [2004]; Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 NY2d 89, 95-96 [1982]; Messinger v Messinger, 16 AD3d 562, 563 [2005]). The Family Court’s determination modifying the visitation schedule and affording the mother visitation on one weekend per month, one night per week, and various other days, was in the children’s best interests (see Matter of Sullivan v Sullivan, 40 AD3d 865 [2007]; Messinger v Messinger, 16 AD3d at 563).

The mother’s remaining contention is without merit. Skelos, J.P., Angiolillo, Leventhal and Belen, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Matter of Cabano v. Petrella
2019 NY Slip Op 1210 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Matter of Pena v. Tiburcio
2018 NY Slip Op 3981 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Matter of Razdan v. Mendoza-Pautrat
137 A.D.3d 1149 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Rosen v. Goldhaber
73 A.D.3d 1184 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Puglisi v. Butler
71 A.D.3d 901 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Catalano v. Catalano
66 A.D.3d 1012 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Shockome v. Shockome
53 A.D.3d 618 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 A.D.3d 829, 853 N.Y.2d 902, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ammirata-v-ammirata-nyappdiv-2008.