Christina F.F. v. Stephen T.C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Christina F.F. v. Stephen T.C.

48 A.D.3d 1112, 849 N.Y.S.2d 858

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

DecidedFebruary 1, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 48 A.D.3d 1112 (Christina F.F. v. Stephen T.C.) 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

Christina F.F. v. Stephen T.C., 48 A.D.3d 1112, 849 N.Y.S.2d 858 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

[1113]*1113Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Seneca County (Dennis F. Bender, J.), entered July 23, 2007 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, among other things, granted petitioner’s application for termination of respondent’s visitation with the parties’ child.

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

Memorandum: Respondent father contends on appeal that Family Court erred in granting petitioner mother’s application to terminate his visitation with the parties’ child and in denying that part of his petition seeking permission to participate with the parties’ child in a residential treatment program. Contrary to the father’s contention, the evidence at the hearing supports the court’s determination “that forcing visitation would be detrimental to the child’s welfare” (Murek v Murek [appeal No. 2], 292 AD2d 839, 840 [2002]). In addition, the court was entitled to credit the testimony of the child’s therapist that the child’s participation with the father in the residential treatment program would likely be counterproductive and could potentially be damaging to the child (see generally Matter of Lonobile v Betkowski, 295 AD2d 994 [2002]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Hurlbutt, Lunn, Green and Gorski, JJ.

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

[1113]*1113Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Seneca County (Dennis F. Bender, J.), entered July 23, 2007 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, among other things, granted petitioner’s application for termination of respondent’s visitation with the parties’ child.

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

Memorandum: Respondent father contends on appeal that Family Court erred in granting petitioner mother’s application to terminate his visitation with the parties’ child and in denying that part of his petition seeking permission to participate with the parties’ child in a residential treatment program. Contrary to the father’s contention, the evidence at the hearing supports the court’s determination “that forcing visitation would be detrimental to the child’s welfare” (Murek v Murek [appeal No. 2], 292 AD2d 839, 840 [2002]). In addition, the court was entitled to credit the testimony of the child’s therapist that the child’s participation with the father in the residential treatment program would likely be counterproductive and could potentially be damaging to the child (see generally Matter of Lonobile v Betkowski, 295 AD2d 994 [2002]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Hurlbutt, Lunn, Green and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.3d 1112, 849 N.Y.S.2d 858, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christina-ff-v-stephen-tc-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack