Matter of Elisha W-B. v. Aidan W.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Elisha W-B. v. Aidan W.

2017 NY Slip Op 5504, 152 A.D.3d 409, 54 N.Y.S.3d 852

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 6, 2017·No. 4404·Published

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Carol Goldstein, J.), entered on or about August 9, 2016, which, inter alia, after a hearing, awarded custody of the subject child to petitioner maternal cousin, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly found that respondent father’s presumptive entitlement to the custody of his son was overcome by petitioner’s showing of extraordinary circumstances based upon the facts that the father had never assumed a primary parental role in the child’s life, had not obtained adequate housing even though the matter was pending for about one year and had failed to contribute support for his son, and the child was afraid of him (see Matter of Jessica Marie C. [Anthony H.], 118 AD3d 601, 602 [1st Dept 2014]; Matter of Cockrell v Burke, 50 AD3d 895 [2d Dept 2008]).

The court’s determination that awarding custody to petitioner was in the child’s best interest was supported by the requisite fair preponderance of the evidence. The record shows that she supported the child, gave structure to his life, took care of his medical and educational needs and provided him with a stable and loving home where he was thriving (see Matter of Joseph S. v Michelle R.F., 3 AD3d 446, 447 [1st Dept 2004]).

Concur— Tom, J.P., Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Mazzarelli and Gische, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County (Carol Goldstein, J.), entered on or about August 9, 2016, which, inter alia, after a hearing, awarded custody of the subject child to petitioner maternal cousin, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly found that respondent father’s presumptive entitlement to the custody of his son was overcome by petitioner’s showing of extraordinary circumstances based upon the facts that the father had never assumed a primary parental role in the child’s life, had not obtained adequate housing even though the matter was pending for about one year and had failed to contribute support for his son, and the child was afraid of him (see Matter of Jessica Marie C. [Anthony H.], 118 AD3d 601, 602 [1st Dept 2014]; Matter of Cockrell v Burke, 50 AD3d 895 [2d Dept 2008]).

The court’s determination that awarding custody to petitioner was in the child’s best interest was supported by the requisite fair preponderance of the evidence. The record shows that she supported the child, gave structure to his life, took care of his medical and educational needs and provided him with a stable and loving home where he was thriving (see Matter of Joseph S. v Michelle R.F., 3 AD3d 446, 447 [1st Dept 2004]).

Concur— Tom, J.P., Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Mazzarelli and Gische, JJ.

Matter of Elisha W-B. v. Aidan W., 2017 NY Slip Op 5504, 152 A.D.3d 409, 54 N.Y.S.3d 852 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

2017 NY Slip Op 5504 (Matter of Elisha W-B. v. Aidan W.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related