Matter of Verrino v. Bright

139 A.D.3d 962, 30 N.Y.S.3d 566
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 18, 2016
Docket2015-03208
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 139 A.D.3d 962 (Matter of Verrino v. Bright) 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 Verrino v. Bright, 139 A.D.3d 962, 30 N.Y.S.3d 566 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Hal B. Greenwald, J.), entered March 13, 2015. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a hearing, denied that branch of the mother’s petition which was for permission to relocate with the subject child to Ohio.

*963 Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The parties, who were never married to each other, are the parents of a son born in 2009. In 2011, the mother filed a petition seeking sole custody of the child and permission to relocate with him to Ohio. After a hearing, the Family Court granted that branch of the mother’s petition which was for sole custody, and denied that branch of her petition which was for permission to relocate.

When reviewing a custodial parent’s request for permission to relocate, the court’s primary focus must be the best interests of the child (see Matter of Tropea v Tropea, 87 NY2d 727, 739 [1996]; Matter of Steadman v Roumer, 81 AD3d 653 [2011]). Here, the Family Court’s determination that the subject child’s best interests would not be served by relocating to Ohio was supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Tropea v Tropea, 87 NY2d at 739; Matter of Karen H. v Maurice G., 101 AD3d 1005 [2012]; Matter of McBryde v Bodden, 91 AD3d 781 [2012]). Accordingly, the court properly denied that branch of the mother’s petition which was for permission to relocate with the child to Ohio.

Dillon, J.P., Chambers, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Matter of Morales v. Savage
2017 NY Slip Op 982 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
139 A.D.3d 962, 30 N.Y.S.3d 566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-verrino-v-bright-nyappdiv-2016.