Cesar Q. v. Yvette S.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cesar Q. v. Yvette S.

268 A.D.2d 396, 700 N.Y.S.2d 835, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 776

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

DecidedJanuary 27, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 268 A.D.2d 396 (Cesar Q. v. Yvette S.) 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

Cesar Q. v. Yvette S., 268 A.D.2d 396, 700 N.Y.S.2d 835, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 776 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Family Court, New York County (Richard Ross, J.), entered on or about November 6, 1997, which, after a hearing, awarded petitioner custody of the two subject children, with provision for visitation by respondent, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The hearing court duly considered the merits and deficiencies of each of the parties with respect to custodial parenting and its finding, based upon that assessment, that it would be in the children’s best interests to award custody to petitioner, cannot be said to lack a sound and substantial basis in the record (see, King v King, 225 AD2d 819, 821, lv denied 88 NY2d 806). Concur—Nardelli, J. P., Ellerin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Family Court, New York County (Richard Ross, J.), entered on or about November 6, 1997, which, after a hearing, awarded petitioner custody of the two subject children, with provision for visitation by respondent, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The hearing court duly considered the merits and deficiencies of each of the parties with respect to custodial parenting and its finding, based upon that assessment, that it would be in the children’s best interests to award custody to petitioner, cannot be said to lack a sound and substantial basis in the record (see, King v King, 225 AD2d 819, 821, lv denied 88 NY2d 806). Concur—Nardelli, J. P., Ellerin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D.2d 396, 700 N.Y.S.2d 835, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 776, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cesar-q-v-yvette-s-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack