Connie L.C. v. Edward C.B.

45 A.D.3d 1374, 845 N.Y.S.2d 892
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 9, 2007
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 45 A.D.3d 1374 (Connie L.C. v. Edward C.B.) 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
Connie L.C. v. Edward C.B., 45 A.D.3d 1374, 845 N.Y.S.2d 892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Jefferson County (Peter A. Schwerzmann, J.), entered July 18, 2006 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, insofar as appealed from, altered respondent’s visitation schedule.

It is hereby ordered that the order insofar as appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the second through fourth ordering paragraphs are vacated.

Memorandum: Petitioner mother commenced this proceeding seeking modification of a prior order establishing respondent father’s visitation schedule with the parties’ 14-year-old child by requiring visitation only in the event that the child agrees to [1375]*1375visit with the father. We conclude that Family Court properly denied the petition insofar as it sought visitation based solely upon the child’s agreement to such visitation (see Matter of Jeffrey T. v Julie B., 35 AD3d 1222 [2006]; see generally Labanowski v Labanowski, 4 AD3d 690, 692-693 [2004]), but we further conclude that the court erred in modifying the prior order by altering the existing visitation schedule, thereby reducing the father’s visitation. “Once a visitation order is entered, it may be modified only ‘upon a showing that there has been a subsequent change of circumstances and modification is required’ ” (Matter of Wilson v McGlinchey, 2 NY3d 375, 380 [2004]; see Matter of Sullivan v Sullivan, 40 AD3d 865, 866 [2007]), and here the mother made no such showing. Present—Scudder, P.J., Martoche, Smith, Lunn and Pine, JJ.

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

Related

Matter of Cooley v. Roloson
2022 NY Slip Op 00534 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
Owens v. Garner
63 A.D.3d 1585 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
45 A.D.3d 1374, 845 N.Y.S.2d 892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/connie-lc-v-edward-cb-nyappdiv-2007.