Matter of Christopher E.C. v. Ivana K.S.

143 A.D.3d 420, 38 N.Y.S.3d 181
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 4, 2016
Docket1801
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 143 A.D.3d 420 (Matter of Christopher E.C. v. Ivana K.S.) 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
Matter of Christopher E.C. v. Ivana K.S., 143 A.D.3d 420, 38 N.Y.S.3d 181 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

*421 Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Jennifer S. Burtt, Ct. Atty. Ref.), entered on or about October 14, 2014, which, to the extent appealed from, as limited by the briefs, granted respondent mother’s application for relocation with the child to Florida, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s determination has a sound and substantial basis in the record, and there is no reason to disturb the court’s findings (see Matter of William G. v Saline G., 132 AD3d 440 [1st Dept 2015]). The court considered all of the relevant factors and properly concluded that the proposed relocation would serve the child’s best interests (see Matter of Tropea v Tropea, 87 NY2d 727, 740-741 [1996]). Respondent mother has demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that a move to Florida would improve the quality of the six-year-old child’s life (see Matter of Kevin McK. v Elizabeth A.E., 111 AD3d 124, 130-131 [1st Dept 2013]). The mother also established that she would continue to foster a relationship between the petitioner father and the child (see Matter of Matthew W. v Meagan R., 68 AD3d 468 [1st Dept 2009]; see e.g. Matter of Damien P.C. v Jennifer H.S., 57 AD3d 295, 296 [1st Dept 2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 710 [2009]). Although the relocation will have an impact upon the father’s ability to spend time with his child, the visitation schedule set by the court will allow for the father and the child to continue to have a meaningful relationship (see Matter of Carmen G. v Rogelio D., 100 AD3d 568 [1st Dept 2012]).

Concur — Friedman, J.R, Saxe, Moskowitz, Gische and Kahn, JJ.

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

Related

Matter of Demetrius C. (David C.)
202 A.D.3d 586 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
Matter of Jamee Bennett G. v. John Nicolaas B.
2021 NY Slip Op 06757 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Matter of Kathy C. v. Alonzo E.
2018 NY Slip Op 234 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
143 A.D.3d 420, 38 N.Y.S.3d 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-christopher-ec-v-ivana-ks-nyappdiv-2016.