Matter of Reyes v. Parker

137 A.D.3d 921, 25 N.Y.S.3d 905
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 9, 2016
Docket2015-02786
StatusPublished

This text of 137 A.D.3d 921 (Matter of Reyes v. Parker) 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 Reyes v. Parker, 137 A.D.3d 921, 25 N.Y.S.3d 905 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (llana Gruebel, J.), dated March 16, 2015. The order, after a hearing, awarded the father sole legal and physical custody of the child and certain visitation to the mother.

*922 Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The parties are the unmarried parents of a son born in November 2006. In April 2011, the mother filed a custody petition pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. Following a hearing, the Family Court granted sole legal and physical custody to the father and certain visitation to the mother. The mother appeals.

In adjudicating custody and visitation rights, the most important factor to be considered is the best interests of the child (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 172 [1982]; Matter of Jules v Corriette, 76 AD3d 1016, 1017 [2010]). “As custody determinations turn in large part on assessments of the credibility, character, temperament, and sincerity of the parties, the Family Court’s determination should not be disturbed unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Tori v Tori, 103 AD3d 654, 655 [2013]).

Here, contrary to the mother’s contention, the Family Court’s determination that the child’s best interests would be served by an award of custody to the father has a sound and substantial basis in the record and, thus, it will not be disturbed (see Matter of McKoy v Vatter, 106 AD3d 1090 [2013]; Matter of Guzman v Pizarro, 102 AD3d 964, 965 [2013]; Matter of Jules v Corriette, 76 AD3d at 1017).

The mother’s remaining contention is without merit.

Rivera, J.R, Hall, Cohen and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Eschbach v. Eschbach
436 N.E.2d 1260 (New York Court of Appeals, 1982)
Guzman v. Pizarro
102 A.D.3d 964 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Tori v. Tori
103 A.D.3d 654 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
McKoy v. Vatter
106 A.D.3d 1090 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
137 A.D.3d 921, 25 N.Y.S.3d 905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-reyes-v-parker-nyappdiv-2016.