Pamela H. v. Cordell W.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pamela H. v. Cordell W.

43 A.D.3d 1319, 841 N.Y.S.2d 907

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

DecidedSeptember 28, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 43 A.D.3d 1319 (Pamela H. v. Cordell W.) 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

Pamela H. v. Cordell W., 43 A.D.3d 1319, 841 N.Y.S.2d 907 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

[1320]*1320Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Monroe County (Anthony J. Sciolino, J.), entered May 15, 2006 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order granted petitioner sole custody of the child, granted permission for the child to relocate out of state with petitioner and awarded visitation to respondent.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Contrary to respondent father’s contention, Family Court properly granted that part of the petition seeking permission for the parties’ child to relocate out of state with petitioner mother. In determining that the relocation was in the best interests of the child, the court properly considered the factors set forth in Matter of Tropea v Tropea (87 NY2d 727, 740-741 [1996]), as well as the effect of the child’s relocation on extended family relationships and the fact that petitioner has been the primary caretaker of the child (see Fruchter v Fruchter, 288 AD2d 942 [2001]; Matter of Boyer v Boyer, 281 AD2d 953 [2001]). The court also considered petitioner’s unsafe living conditions in Rochester, which resulted in part from the failure of respondent to satisfy his child support and other financial obligations. We further reject respondent’s contention that Tropea is inapplicable because the parties were “equal custodial caretakers” (Matter of Sara B v Richard T, 175 Misc 2d 988, 992 [1998]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Martoche, Lunn, Peradotto and Green, JJ. [See 12 Misc 3d 1159(A), 2006 NY Slip Op 50969(U).]

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

[1320]*1320Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Monroe County (Anthony J. Sciolino, J.), entered May 15, 2006 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order granted petitioner sole custody of the child, granted permission for the child to relocate out of state with petitioner and awarded visitation to respondent.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Contrary to respondent father’s contention, Family Court properly granted that part of the petition seeking permission for the parties’ child to relocate out of state with petitioner mother. In determining that the relocation was in the best interests of the child, the court properly considered the factors set forth in Matter of Tropea v Tropea (87 NY2d 727, 740-741 [1996]), as well as the effect of the child’s relocation on extended family relationships and the fact that petitioner has been the primary caretaker of the child (see Fruchter v Fruchter, 288 AD2d 942 [2001]; Matter of Boyer v Boyer, 281 AD2d 953 [2001]). The court also considered petitioner’s unsafe living conditions in Rochester, which resulted in part from the failure of respondent to satisfy his child support and other financial obligations. We further reject respondent’s contention that Tropea is inapplicable because the parties were “equal custodial caretakers” (Matter of Sara B v Richard T, 175 Misc 2d 988, 992 [1998]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Martoche, Lunn, Peradotto and Green, JJ. [See 12 Misc 3d 1159(A), 2006 NY Slip Op 50969(U).]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.3d 1319, 841 N.Y.S.2d 907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pamela-h-v-cordell-w-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack