Fuchs v. Fuchs

208 A.D.2d 895, 618 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10684
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Fuchs v. Fuchs. Read the opinion of the Court — 216 A.D.2d 648

Opinion

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Kaiser, J.H.O.), entered October 5, 1992, which, after a hearing, granted the defendant wife permission to relocate to the Washington, D.C. area with the parties’ minor daughter.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We cannot say that the court, in granting the defendant mother permission to relocate with the parties’ minor child, erred in finding special circumstances under the totality of this case (see, Matter of Radford v Propper, 190 AD2d 93). Moreover, the record clearly established that the court’s ruling was in the child’s best interest. Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.

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

Fuchs v. Fuchs, 208 A.D.2d 895, 618 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10684 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

208 A.D.2d 895 (Fuchs v. Fuchs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Radford v. Propper
190 A.D.2d 93 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)