Barros v. Barros

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Barros v. Barros

85 A.D.3d 1605, 924 N.Y.S.2d 905

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 10, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 85 A.D.3d 1605 (Barros v. Barros) 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

Barros v. Barros, 85 A.D.3d 1605, 924 N.Y.S.2d 905 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Steuben County (Timothy K. Mattison, J.H.O.), entered March 15, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, inter alia, denied the petition of petitioner-respondent for modification of a prior order of custody and visitation.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner-respondent father appeals from an order that, inter alia, denied his petition seeking to modify a prior order of custody and visitation by awarding him sole custody of the parties’ children. We affirm. Contrary to the father’s contention, the continuation of the joint custody arrangement is in the best interests of the children (see generally Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 171, 173-174 [1982]). Present — Smith, J.P., Fahey, Garni, Lindley and Gorski, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Steuben County (Timothy K. Mattison, J.H.O.), entered March 15, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, inter alia, denied the petition of petitioner-respondent for modification of a prior order of custody and visitation.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner-respondent father appeals from an order that, inter alia, denied his petition seeking to modify a prior order of custody and visitation by awarding him sole custody of the parties’ children. We affirm. Contrary to the father’s contention, the continuation of the joint custody arrangement is in the best interests of the children (see generally Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 171, 173-174 [1982]). Present — Smith, J.P., Fahey, Garni, Lindley and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

85 A.D.3d 1605, 924 N.Y.S.2d 905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barros-v-barros-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack