Gant v. Chambliss

86 A.D.3d 612, 926 N.Y.2d 918
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 19, 2011
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 86 A.D.3d 612 (Gant v. Chambliss) 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
Gant v. Chambliss, 86 A.D.3d 612, 926 N.Y.2d 918 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

[613]*613“Custody determinations are ordinarily a matter of discretion for the hearing court, whose determination will not be set aside on appeal unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Ortiz v Maharaj, 8 AD3d 574, 574 [2004]). Here, there was a sound and substantial basis for the Family Court’s denial of the mother’s petition to modify a prior order of custody dated October 24, 1996 (see Matter of Reyes v Alvarado, 50 AD3d 1152 [2008]). “ ‘Modification of an existing custody or visitation arrangement is permissible only upon a showing that there has been a change in circumstances such that a modification is necessary to ensure the continued best interests and welfare of the child’ ” (Matter of Mazzola v Lee, 76 AD3d 531, 531 [2010], quoting Matter of Leichter-Kessler v Kessler, 71 AD3d 1148, 1148-1149 [2010]). The evidence in the record amply supported the Family Court’s determination that the circumstances did not warrant a modification.

The Family Court’s determination that supervised visitation by the mother would be in the child’s best interests also had a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Lorraine D. v Widmack C., 79 AD3d 745, 745-746 [2010]; Matter of Anwar v Sani, 78 AD3d 827 [2010]). Angiolillo, J.P., Dickerson, Hall and Roman, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Fortunato v. Murray
91 A.D.3d 947 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Williams v. Dowgiallo
90 A.D.3d 942 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Zwillman v. Kull
90 A.D.3d 774 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
86 A.D.3d 612, 926 N.Y.2d 918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gant-v-chambliss-nyappdiv-2011.