Mollet v. Mollet

99 A.D.3d 1007, 952 N.Y.2d 470
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 24, 2012
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 99 A.D.3d 1007 (Mollet v. Mollet) 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
Mollet v. Mollet, 99 A.D.3d 1007, 952 N.Y.2d 470 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

“ ‘ “In order to modify an existing custody or visitation arrangement, there must be a showing that there has been a change in circumstances such that modification is required to protect the best interests of the child” ’ ” (Matter of Francois v Grimm, 84 AD3d 1082 [2011], quoting Matter of Peralta v Irrizary, 76 AD3d 561, 562 [2010]; see Family Ct Act § 652). “The best interests of the child are determined by a review of the totality of the circumstances” (Matter of Garcia v Fountain, 82 AD3d 979, 980 [2011]).

[1008]*1008Here, the Family Court’s award of sole legal and physical custody of the subject child to the mother has a sound and substantial basis in the record and will not be disturbed (see Matter of McDonough v McDonough, 73 AD3d 1067, 1068 [2010]; Matter of Tercjak v Tercjak, 49 AD3d 772 [2008]).

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Eng, EJ., Skelos, Lott and Cohen, JJ., concur.

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

Related

McVey v. Barnett
107 A.D.3d 808 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Luo v. Yang
103 A.D.3d 636 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
99 A.D.3d 1007, 952 N.Y.2d 470, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mollet-v-mollet-nyappdiv-2012.