Matter of Simonetti v. Simonetti

2026 NY Slip Op 00781

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: February 11, 2026
• Docket: Docket No. V-6985-24
• Status: Published

Opinion

Matter of Simonetti v Simonetti (2026 NY Slip Op 00781)

Matter of Simonetti v Simonetti

2026 NY Slip Op 00781

Decided on February 11, 2026

Appellate Division, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on February 11, 2026 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
BETSY BARROS, J.P.
HELEN VOUTSINAS
DONNA-MARIE E. GOLIA
PHILLIP HOM, JJ.

2024-03476
(Docket No. V-6985-24)

[*1]In the Matter of Maria Fabia Simonetti, appellant,

v

Gerard Anthony Simonetti, respondent.

Maria Fabia Simonetti, Brooklyn, NY, appellant pro se.

Moss & Moss LLP, New York, NY (Dena S. Moss of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Sandra M. Munoz, J.), dated April 3, 2024. The order dismissed the mother's petition for custody of the parties' child with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The parties' child was born in Brazil in 2011. In 2024, the mother commenced a custody proceeding in the Family Court, Kings County.

Contrary to the mother's contentions, the Family Court properly dismissed her petition for custody of the child with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The record before the court confirmed that the child had not resided in New York "for at least six consecutive months immediately before the commencement of [this] proceeding" and that New York was therefore not the child's home state (Matter of Louis-Charles v White, 209 AD3d 1030, 1030; see Domestic Relations Law §§ 75-a[7]; 76[1][a]; Matter of Gathiaka v Mubea, 202 AD3d 678, 678). Indeed, the child has never lived in the United States. The child was born in Brazil, has lived there her entire life, has not traveled to the United States, and the issue of custody was previously determined by a Brazilian court.

Accordingly, the Family Court properly dismissed the mother's custody petition with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The parties' remaining contentions either are not properly before this Court, are without merit, or need not be reached in light of our determination.

BARROS, J.P., VOUTSINAS, GOLIA and HOM, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court