Bello v. Bello

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bello v. Bello

78 A.D.2d 547, 432 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12886

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

DecidedSeptember 29, 1980

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 78 A.D.2d 547 (Bello v. Bello) 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

Bello v. Bello, 78 A.D.2d 547, 432 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the petitioner father from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated November 15, 1979, which, after a hearing, dismissed his petition seeking a change of custody. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The Family Court properly dismissed the petition because there was no material change of circumstances warranting a transfer of custody from the mother to the father (see Matter of Ebert v Ebert, 38 NY2d 700). Petitioner was afforded a full and adequate hearing at which he failed to sustain his burden of showing why a change of custody was necessary. A reading of the record reveals that the Family Court Judge considered and weighed all of the factors, including the best interests of the children and the fitness of the respective parties as parents, and made his ruling after a thoughtful analysis thereof. Mollen, P. J., Lazer, Cohalan and Margett, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the petitioner father from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated November 15, 1979, which, after a hearing, dismissed his petition seeking a change of custody. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The Family Court properly dismissed the petition because there was no material change of circumstances warranting a transfer of custody from the mother to the father (see Matter of Ebert v Ebert, 38 NY2d 700). Petitioner was afforded a full and adequate hearing at which he failed to sustain his burden of showing why a change of custody was necessary. A reading of the record reveals that the Family Court Judge considered and weighed all of the factors, including the best interests of the children and the fitness of the respective parties as parents, and made his ruling after a thoughtful analysis thereof. Mollen, P. J., Lazer, Cohalan and Margett, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 A.D.2d 547, 432 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bello-v-bello-nyappdiv-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack