Hughes v. Davis

68 A.D.3d 1674, 890 N.Y.2d 874
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 30, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 68 A.D.3d 1674 (Hughes v. Davis) 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
Hughes v. Davis, 68 A.D.3d 1674, 890 N.Y.2d 874 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

[1675]*1675Memorandum: Upon her return from active military duty, petitioner mother filed a petition seeking to modify a prior order of custody. Family Court granted respondent father’s motion to dismiss the petition without conducting a hearing based on its determination that the mother had “failed to show a change of circumstances.” We conclude, based on the recent enactment of Family Court Act § 651 (f), that the petition should be reinstated.

It is well settled that, in seeking to modify an existing order of custody, “[t]he petitioner must make a sufficient evidentiary showing of a change in circumstances to require a hearing on the issue whether the existing custody order should be modified” (Matter of Di Fiore v Scott, 2 AD3d 1417, 1417-1418 [2003] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Pursuant to Family Court Act § 651 (f) (3), “the return of the parent from active military service, deployment or temporary assignment shall be considered a substantial change in circumstances. Upon the request of either parent, the court shall determine on the basis of the child’s best interests whether the custody judgment or order previously in effect should be modified” (see Domestic Relations Law § 75-1 [3]; § 240 [1] [a-2] [3]). Here, the mother alleged that she had returned from active military duty and thus made a sufficient evidentiary showing of a substantial change in circumstances (see generally Di Fiore, 2 AD3d 1417 [2003]). Present — Martoche, J.P, Smith, Fahey, Garni and Pine, JJ.

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

Related

Matter of Joshua X. v. Alexandria Y.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2026
STEVENSON, II, LARRY D. v. SMITH, TRICIA A.
145 A.D.3d 1598 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
JONES, ROBERT v. LAIRD, THERESA
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
Jones v. Laird
119 A.D.3d 1434 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
O'CONNELL, DANIEL v. O'CONNELL, MARY
105 A.D.3d 1367 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
KAIRIS, GREGORY A. v. SMITH KAIRIS, BELINDA A.
98 A.D.3d 1281 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
ORZECH, PATRICIA v. NIKIEL, GARY A.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012
Orzech v. Nikiel
91 A.D.3d 1305 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
MESSIMORE, HOWARD G. v. MESSIMORE, STACY M.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011
Messimore v. Messimore
89 A.D.3d 1547 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
WALKER, ANTWAN v. CAMERON, JAMIKA
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011
Walker v. Cameron
88 A.D.3d 1307 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
HOWDEN, CURTIS P. v. KEELER, NAOMI R.
85 A.D.3d 1561 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
68 A.D.3d 1674, 890 N.Y.2d 874, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hughes-v-davis-nyappdiv-2009.