Lauko v. Moroney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lauko v. Moroney

209 A.D.2d 413, 619 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10937

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

DecidedNovember 7, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 209 A.D.2d 413 (Lauko v. Moroney) 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

Lauko v. Moroney, 209 A.D.2d 413, 619 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10937 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding to modify a prior custody award pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the petitioner appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Tolbert, J.), entered October 3, 1991, as, after a hearing, denied her petition seeking modification of a prior custody order of the same court, entered May 14, 1990, and determined that custody should remain with the respondent.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

In this case, where the natural mother sought to modify a valid custody order, the Family Court properly considered the testimony of the witnesses and the factors involved (see, Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 172-173; Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 NY2d 89, 94, citing Matter of Nehra v Uhlar, 43 NY2d 242), and we find no basis for disturbing its determination (see, Eschbach v Eschbach, supra).

We have considered the petitioner’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Ritter, J. P., Copertino, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding to modify a prior custody award pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the petitioner appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Tolbert, J.), entered October 3, 1991, as, after a hearing, denied her petition seeking modification of a prior custody order of the same court, entered May 14, 1990, and determined that custody should remain with the respondent.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

In this case, where the natural mother sought to modify a valid custody order, the Family Court properly considered the testimony of the witnesses and the factors involved (see, Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 172-173; Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 NY2d 89, 94, citing Matter of Nehra v Uhlar, 43 NY2d 242), and we find no basis for disturbing its determination (see, Eschbach v Eschbach, supra).

We have considered the petitioner’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Ritter, J. P., Copertino, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 413, 619 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lauko-v-moroney-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack