Gooler v. Gooler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gooler v. Gooler

40 A.D.3d 696, 833 N.Y.S.2d 914

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

DecidedMay 8, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.D.3d 696 (Gooler v. Gooler) 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

Gooler v. Gooler, 40 A.D.3d 696, 833 N.Y.S.2d 914 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of divorce of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Rosenwasser, J.), dated April 28, 2006, as, after a nonjury trial, awarded custody of the parties’ children to the plaintiff.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the father’s contention, the Supreme Court considered the totality of the circumstances in determining that the best interests of the children would be served by awarding the mother sole custody (see Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 NY2d 89, 95 [1982]; Grossman v Grossman, 5 AD3d 546 [2004]). Since the Supreme Court’s determination has a sound and substantial basis in the record, it will not be disturbed (see Matter of Palm v Palm, 15 AD3d 405 [2005]; Matter of Plate v Plate, 264 AD2d 447 [1999]; Matter of Kom v Kom, 167 AD2d 492 [1990]).

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Schmidt, J.E, Santucci, Florio and Balkin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of divorce of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Rosenwasser, J.), dated April 28, 2006, as, after a nonjury trial, awarded custody of the parties’ children to the plaintiff.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the father’s contention, the Supreme Court considered the totality of the circumstances in determining that the best interests of the children would be served by awarding the mother sole custody (see Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 NY2d 89, 95 [1982]; Grossman v Grossman, 5 AD3d 546 [2004]). Since the Supreme Court’s determination has a sound and substantial basis in the record, it will not be disturbed (see Matter of Palm v Palm, 15 AD3d 405 [2005]; Matter of Plate v Plate, 264 AD2d 447 [1999]; Matter of Kom v Kom, 167 AD2d 492 [1990]).

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Schmidt, J.E, Santucci, Florio and Balkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.3d 696, 833 N.Y.S.2d 914, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gooler-v-gooler-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack