Matter of Acampora v. Diaz
Opinion
It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.
Bureau Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter
Matter of Acampora v Diaz
2026 NY Slip Op 04295
July 8, 2026
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
In the Matter of Nicholas Acampora, respondent,
v
Caitlin Diaz, appellant
Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Decided on July 8, 2026
2024-11763, (Docket No. V-10686-22)
Mark C. Dillon, J.P.
Linda Christopher
Carl J. Landicino
Phillip Hom, JJ.
Helene Chowes, New York, NY, for appellant.
Placidus Aguwa, Jamaica, NY, attorney for the child.
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Joan L. Piccirillo, J.), dated October 30, 2024. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a hearing, in effect, granted the father's petition for sole legal and residential custody of the parties' child, with certain parental access to the mother.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The parties have one child together, who was born in 2020. In July 2022, the father commenced this proceeding for sole custody of the child. In an order dated October 30, 2024, the Family Court, after a hearing, inter alia, awarded the father sole legal and residential custody of the child, with certain parental access to the mother. The mother appeals.
The paramount concern in matters of custody and parental access is the best interests of the child under the totality of the circumstances (see Matter of Romero-Flores v Hernandez, 214 AD3d 882, 882; Matter of Soto v Marrero, 214 AD3d 814, 815). In determining the child's best interests, the court must consider, among other things, (1) which alternative will best promote stability; (2) the available home environments; (3) the past performance of each parent; (4) each parent's relative fitness, including his or her ability to guide the child, provide for the child's overall well being, and foster the child's relationship with the noncustodial parent; and (5) the child's desires (see Matter of Beale v Patterson, 236 AD3d 900, 901; Matter of Sookchan v Sookchan, 234 AD3d 779, 780). Inasmuch as a court's custody determination is dependent in large part upon its assessment of the witnesses' credibility and upon the character, temperament, and sincerity of the parents, the court's custody determination will not be disturbed if it is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Abraham v Banaszek, 242 AD3d 878, 880; Agulnick v Agulnick, 189 AD3d 956, 957).
Here, the Family Court's determination is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record. Contrary to the mother's contention, the record demonstrated that the parties' relationship was so acrimonious that it effectively precluded joint decision-making such that joint legal custody of the child was inappropriate (see Matter of Clarke v Clarke, 222 AD3d 751, 752; Matter of Cywiak v Packman, 214 AD3d 654, 657). Moreover, the evidence presented at the hearing [*2]demonstrated, among other things, that the father was better suited to promote stability in the child's life and provide for his overall well being, as well as more likely to foster the child's relationship with the noncustodial parent (see Matter of Gleason v Ireland, 240 AD3d 494, 496; Matter of Smisek v DeSantis, 239 AD3d 867, 870; Matter of Eckstein v Young, 176 AD3d 813, 815-816).
Accordingly, the Family Court properly awarded the father sole legal and residential custody of the child, with certain parental access to the mother.
DILLON, J.P., CHRISTOPHER, LANDICINO and HOM, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Darrell M. Joseph
Clerk of the Court
Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Matter of Acampora v. Diaz (Matter of Acampora v. Diaz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.