Bliss ex rel. Ach v. Ach

86 A.D.2d 575, 446 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15097
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 26, 1982
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 86 A.D.2d 575 (Bliss ex rel. Ach v. Ach) 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
Bliss ex rel. Ach v. Ach, 86 A.D.2d 575, 446 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15097 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Opinion

Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Wallach, J.) entered August 26, 1981, awarding primary custody to petitioner with joint custody to the respondent and fixing visitation rights and providing for other related relief modified, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent only of striking the provision granting joint custody to respondent, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Wallach, J.) entered November 5, 1981, denying respondent’s motion for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence is dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in Appeal No. 12603. Order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Wallach, J.) entered November 23, 1981, denying respondent’s motion for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence affirmed, without costs. We are in substantial agreement with the holding of the trial court on the issue of custody. Our sole point of departure concerns the issue of “joint” custody. Normally such a provision is cosmetic only and is employed to salve the feelings of the defeated parent. The parent to whom “basic” custody is granted becomes for all practical purposes, the parent who has custody and makes the decisions affecting the child. In this case, however, the requirements for constant consultation on matters necessarily entailed in the concept of joint custody will exacerbate the sharp differences evidenced between these unmarried parents. It will merely be the seed for unending future litigation, with resultant damage to the child. While leaving the visitation provisions intact, we deem it wiser to grant custody to a single parent, the mother. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Lupiano and Bloom, JJ.

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

Related

M.R. v. A.D.
32 Misc. 3d 512 (New York Supreme Court, 2011)
McDermott v. Berolzheimer
210 A.D.2d 559 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Cheryl A. D. v. Jeffrey G. O.
133 Misc. 2d 663 (NYC Family Court, 1986)
Stanat v. Stanat
93 A.D.2d 114 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
86 A.D.2d 575, 446 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15097, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bliss-ex-rel-ach-v-ach-nyappdiv-1982.