Luis H. v. Latima P.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Luis H. v. Latima P.

143 A.D.3d 469, 38 N.Y.S.3d 424

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

DecidedOctober 6, 2016

Docket1823

StatusPublished

This text of 143 A.D.3d 469 (Luis H. v. Latima P.) 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

Luis H. v. Latima P., 143 A.D.3d 469, 38 N.Y.S.3d 424 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Fiordaliza A. Rodriguez, J.), entered on or about July 10, 2015, which granted legal and physical custody to petitioner father, with visitation to respondent mother, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court had sufficient information to determine, without a plenary evidentiary hearing, that it was in the child’s best interest to reside with the father during the pendency of this matter (see Matter of Myles M. v Pei-Fong K., 93 AD3d 474 [1st Dept 2012]; Rodman v Friedman, 33 AD3d 400 [1st Dept 2006], lv dismissed 8 NY3d 895 [2007]). The record shows that the mother tested positive for drugs when the child was under her *470 care, and she admitted to drug use in open court. There was also a neglect proceeding commenced involving the mother’s other child.

The determination that awarding custody to the father with visitation to the mother would be in the best interests of the child is supported by a sound and substantial basis and is entitled to deference (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 172-174 [1982]). The record demonstrates that the father has parented the child appropriately, has provided a loving and stable home environment and has made sure to obtain the services that the child requires.

Concur — Renwick, J.P., Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County (Fiordaliza A. Rodriguez, J.), entered on or about July 10, 2015, which granted legal and physical custody to petitioner father, with visitation to respondent mother, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court had sufficient information to determine, without a plenary evidentiary hearing, that it was in the child’s best interest to reside with the father during the pendency of this matter (see Matter of Myles M. v Pei-Fong K., 93 AD3d 474 [1st Dept 2012]; Rodman v Friedman, 33 AD3d 400 [1st Dept 2006], lv dismissed 8 NY3d 895 [2007]). The record shows that the mother tested positive for drugs when the child was under her *470 care, and she admitted to drug use in open court. There was also a neglect proceeding commenced involving the mother’s other child.

The determination that awarding custody to the father with visitation to the mother would be in the best interests of the child is supported by a sound and substantial basis and is entitled to deference (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 172-174 [1982]). The record demonstrates that the father has parented the child appropriately, has provided a loving and stable home environment and has made sure to obtain the services that the child requires.

Concur — Renwick, J.P., Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman and Kapnick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 A.D.3d 469, 38 N.Y.S.3d 424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/luis-h-v-latima-p-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack