Mohney v. Springstead

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mohney v. Springstead

281 A.D.2d 991, 722 N.Y.S.2d 443, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2835

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

DecidedMarch 21, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 281 A.D.2d 991 (Mohney v. Springstead) 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

Mohney v. Springstead, 281 A.D.2d 991, 722 N.Y.S.2d 443, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2835 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Family Court properly determined that it was in the best interests of the child to award joint custody to the parties, with physical placement of the child with petitioner, his father. In making its custody determination, the court properly considered the “child’s emotional and intellectual development, the quality of [992]*992the home environment and the parental guidance provided” (Matter of Louise E.S. v W. Stephen S., 64 NY2d 946, 947), and the court was in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses in determining the best interests of the child (see, Matter of Paul C. v Tracy C., 209 AD2d 955, 956). (Appeal from Order of Chautauqua County Family Court, Claire, J.— Custody.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Kehoe, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Family Court properly determined that it was in the best interests of the child to award joint custody to the parties, with physical placement of the child with petitioner, his father. In making its custody determination, the court properly considered the “child’s emotional and intellectual development, the quality of [992]*992the home environment and the parental guidance provided” (Matter of Louise E.S. v W. Stephen S., 64 NY2d 946, 947), and the court was in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses in determining the best interests of the child (see, Matter of Paul C. v Tracy C., 209 AD2d 955, 956). (Appeal from Order of Chautauqua County Family Court, Claire, J.— Custody.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Kehoe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D.2d 991, 722 N.Y.S.2d 443, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2835, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mohney-v-springstead-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack