Richardson v. Ludwig

126 A.D.3d 1546, 4 N.Y.S.3d 570
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 27, 2015
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 126 A.D.3d 1546 (Richardson v. Ludwig) 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
Richardson v. Ludwig, 126 A.D.3d 1546, 4 N.Y.S.3d 570 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Herkimer County (Anthony J. Garramone, J.H.O.), dated April 8, 2014 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order granted petitioner visitation with the subject children.

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

[1547]*1547Memorandum: Petitioner, the maternal grandmother of the subject grandchildren, commenced this proceeding seeking visitation with them, and respondent mother appeals from an order that granted the petition, awarding the grandmother, inter alia, a minimum of six hours of visitation one weekend day per month with two of the subject grandchildren. We reject the mother’s contention that Family Court erred in concluding that the grandmother had standing to seek visitation pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 72 (1), inasmuch as the grandmother established that “conditions exist [in] which equity would see fit to intervene” (see id.; Matter of E.S. v P.D., 8 NY3d 150, 157 [2007]; Matter of Hilgenberg v Hertel, 100 AD3d 1432, 1433 [2012]). We also reject the mother’s contention that the court erred in granting the petition. We conclude that the record supports the court’s determination, which was based in part upon the credibility of the witnesses (see generally Hilgenberg, 100 AD3d at 1434), that visitation is in the best interests of those subject grandchildren (see Matter of Morgan v Grzesik, 287 AD2d 150, 156 [2001]; cf. Hilgenberg, 100 AD3d at 1434-1435).

Present — Smith, J.P., Valentino, Whalen and DeJoseph, JJ.

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

Related

Matter of Panebianco v. Panebianco
2020 NY Slip Op 2566 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Smith v. Ballam
2019 NY Slip Op 7170 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
126 A.D.3d 1546, 4 N.Y.S.3d 570, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richardson-v-ludwig-nyappdiv-2015.