Chieco v. Finn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chieco v. Finn

68 A.D.3d 762, 891 N.Y.2d 280

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

DecidedDecember 1, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 68 A.D.3d 762 (Chieco v. Finn) 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

Chieco v. Finn, 68 A.D.3d 762, 891 N.Y.2d 280 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

In determining whether to modify a custody arrangement to which the parties voluntarily agreed, the principal issue before the court is whether a change in circumstances warrants a modification in the best interests of the child (see Matter of Awan v Awan, 63 AD3d 733, 734 [2009]; Matter of Lopez v Infante, 55 AD3d 837, 838 [2008]; Matter of Penn v Penn, 41 AD3d 724, 724-725 [2007]). Since custody determinations depend to a great extent upon an assessment of the character and credibility of the parties and witnesses, deference is accorded to the Family Court’s findings, and such findings will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Perez v Martinez, 52 AD3d 518, 519 [2008]; Matter of Langlaise v Sookhan, 48 AD3d 685 [2008]; Matter of Tavarez v Musse, 31 AD3d 458 [2006]).

Here, the Family Court properly considered numerous factors in making its custody determination. The Family Court’s determination that there was a change of circumstances and that the best interests of the subject child would be served by awarding residential custody to the mother is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record and should not be disturbed (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 174 [1982]; Matter of Oates v Wilson, 46 AD3d 904, 905 [2007]). Covello, J.P., Santucci, Chambers and Lott, JJ., concur.

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

In determining whether to modify a custody arrangement to which the parties voluntarily agreed, the principal issue before the court is whether a change in circumstances warrants a modification in the best interests of the child (see Matter of Awan v Awan, 63 AD3d 733, 734 [2009]; Matter of Lopez v Infante, 55 AD3d 837, 838 [2008]; Matter of Penn v Penn, 41 AD3d 724, 724-725 [2007]). Since custody determinations depend to a great extent upon an assessment of the character and credibility of the parties and witnesses, deference is accorded to the Family Court’s findings, and such findings will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Perez v Martinez, 52 AD3d 518, 519 [2008]; Matter of Langlaise v Sookhan, 48 AD3d 685 [2008]; Matter of Tavarez v Musse, 31 AD3d 458 [2006]).

Here, the Family Court properly considered numerous factors in making its custody determination. The Family Court’s determination that there was a change of circumstances and that the best interests of the subject child would be served by awarding residential custody to the mother is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record and should not be disturbed (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 174 [1982]; Matter of Oates v Wilson, 46 AD3d 904, 905 [2007]). Covello, J.P., Santucci, Chambers and Lott, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 A.D.3d 762, 891 N.Y.2d 280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chieco-v-finn-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack