Gatke v. Johnson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gatke v. Johnson

50 A.D.3d 798, 854 N.Y.S.2d 660

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

DecidedApril 8, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 50 A.D.3d 798 (Gatke v. Johnson) 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

Gatke v. Johnson, 50 A.D.3d 798, 854 N.Y.S.2d 660 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Phillips, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated November 29, 2006, which, after a hearing, granted the father’s petition to transfer sole custody of the subject child from her to him and established a visitation schedule for her.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements, the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Nassau County, for a new hearing, and thereafter a new determination consistent herewith, and the subject child shall remain in the custody of the mother pending final determination of the petition.

The attorney for the child on this appeal has raised significant issues regarding developments that have arisen since the date of the order on appeal that preclude us from determining which custodial arrangement is in the child’s best interests (see Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299, 318 [1992]; Matter of Londel Chavis C., 41 AD3d 843 [2007]; Matter of Antonette Alasha E., 8 AD3d 375, 376 [2004]). Accordingly, the proceeding must be remitted to the Family Court, Nassau County, for a new hearing and a new custody determination thereafter. We express no opinion as to the appropriate determination. Spolzino, J.P., Miller, Covello and Balkin, JJ., concur.

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

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Phillips, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated November 29, 2006, which, after a hearing, granted the father’s petition to transfer sole custody of the subject child from her to him and established a visitation schedule for her.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements, the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Nassau County, for a new hearing, and thereafter a new determination consistent herewith, and the subject child shall remain in the custody of the mother pending final determination of the petition.

The attorney for the child on this appeal has raised significant issues regarding developments that have arisen since the date of the order on appeal that preclude us from determining which custodial arrangement is in the child’s best interests (see Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299, 318 [1992]; Matter of Londel Chavis C., 41 AD3d 843 [2007]; Matter of Antonette Alasha E., 8 AD3d 375, 376 [2004]). Accordingly, the proceeding must be remitted to the Family Court, Nassau County, for a new hearing and a new custody determination thereafter. We express no opinion as to the appropriate determination. Spolzino, J.P., Miller, Covello and Balkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.3d 798, 854 N.Y.S.2d 660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gatke-v-johnson-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack