Matter of Nairen McI. v. Cindy J.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Nairen McI. v. Cindy J.

137 A.D.3d 694, 27 N.Y.S.3d 854

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

DecidedMarch 31, 2016

Docket652

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 137 A.D.3d 694 (Matter of Nairen McI. v. Cindy J.) 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 Nairen McI. v. Cindy J., 137 A.D.3d 694, 27 N.Y.S.3d 854 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

*695 Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Ruben A. Martino, J.), entered on or about October 18, 2014, which, after a hearing, denied petitioner father’s petition to, among other things, modify a final custody order to require that the parties’ child live in New York State, and granted respondent mother’s petition to, among other things, permit her and the child to relocate to Tennessee, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to grant the father expanded parenting time with the child to the extent indicated in this decision, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Family Court’s relocation determination has a sound and substantial basis in the record, as the mother established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that relocation to Tennessee would serve the best interests of the child (Matter of Tropea v Tropea, 87 NY2d 727, 739, 741 [1996]). The mother testified regarding the improvement in the child’s academic performance in her Tennessee school, compared to her performance in her former Bronx school; the improvement in, and reduced cost of, health care in Tennessee for the mother’s younger daughter; and the general improvement in the family’s quality of life, including the lower cost of living and housing, and the mother’s ability to obtain employment in Tennessee (see Matter of Kevin McK. v Elizabeth A.E., 111 AD3d 124, 130-131 [1st Dept 2013]). In addition, the child prefers to remain in Tennessee with her mother (Matter of Aliyah B. [Denise J.], 87 AD3d 943, 944 [1st Dept 2011]). Moreover, the father’s failure to pay child support is a factor in support of relocation (Matter of Kevin McK., 111 AD3d at 128, 131, 133). There is no basis to disturb Family Court’s credibility determinations.

In accordance with the child’s request, Family Court’s order should be modified to increase the father’s parenting time with the child to the extent of permitting the child to spend all school recesses during the school year of longer than four days with the father. According to the child’s school calender, those recesses currently consist of “Fall Break,” “Winter Break,” and “Spring Break & Good Friday.” In addition, the summer recess shall be equally split between the parents.

Concur—Mazzarelli, J.R, Renwick, Moskowitz, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.

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

*695 Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Ruben A. Martino, J.), entered on or about October 18, 2014, which, after a hearing, denied petitioner father’s petition to, among other things, modify a final custody order to require that the parties’ child live in New York State, and granted respondent mother’s petition to, among other things, permit her and the child to relocate to Tennessee, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to grant the father expanded parenting time with the child to the extent indicated in this decision, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Family Court’s relocation determination has a sound and substantial basis in the record, as the mother established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that relocation to Tennessee would serve the best interests of the child (Matter of Tropea v Tropea, 87 NY2d 727, 739, 741 [1996]). The mother testified regarding the improvement in the child’s academic performance in her Tennessee school, compared to her performance in her former Bronx school; the improvement in, and reduced cost of, health care in Tennessee for the mother’s younger daughter; and the general improvement in the family’s quality of life, including the lower cost of living and housing, and the mother’s ability to obtain employment in Tennessee (see Matter of Kevin McK. v Elizabeth A.E., 111 AD3d 124, 130-131 [1st Dept 2013]). In addition, the child prefers to remain in Tennessee with her mother (Matter of Aliyah B. [Denise J.], 87 AD3d 943, 944 [1st Dept 2011]). Moreover, the father’s failure to pay child support is a factor in support of relocation (Matter of Kevin McK., 111 AD3d at 128, 131, 133). There is no basis to disturb Family Court’s credibility determinations.

In accordance with the child’s request, Family Court’s order should be modified to increase the father’s parenting time with the child to the extent of permitting the child to spend all school recesses during the school year of longer than four days with the father. According to the child’s school calender, those recesses currently consist of “Fall Break,” “Winter Break,” and “Spring Break & Good Friday.” In addition, the summer recess shall be equally split between the parents.

Concur—Mazzarelli, J.R, Renwick, Moskowitz, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A.D.3d 694, 27 N.Y.S.3d 854, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-nairen-mci-v-cindy-j-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack