Rodriquez v. Van Putten

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rodriquez v. Van Putten

309 A.D.2d 807, 765 N.Y.S.2d 796

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

DecidedOctober 14, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 309 A.D.2d 807 (Rodriquez v. Van Putten) 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

Rodriquez v. Van Putten, 309 A.D.2d 807, 765 N.Y.S.2d 796 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Balter, J.), dated October 29, 2001, which, after a hearing, denied his petition for visitation.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

While the father’s incarceration, standing alone, did not render visitation inappropriate (see Matter of Davis v Davis, 232 AD2d 773 [1996]; Matter of Mohammed v Cortland County Dept. of Social Servs., 186 AD2d 908 [1992]), the Family Court properly determined that, under all of the circumstances, visitation would not be in the child’s best interest (see Matter of Marcial v Sullivan, 296 AD2d 551 [2002]; Matter of Williams v Tillman, 289 AD2d 885 [2001]; Matter of Davis v Davis, 265 AD2d 552 [1999]).

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., Florio, S. Miller and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Balter, J.), dated October 29, 2001, which, after a hearing, denied his petition for visitation.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

While the father’s incarceration, standing alone, did not render visitation inappropriate (see Matter of Davis v Davis, 232 AD2d 773 [1996]; Matter of Mohammed v Cortland County Dept. of Social Servs., 186 AD2d 908 [1992]), the Family Court properly determined that, under all of the circumstances, visitation would not be in the child’s best interest (see Matter of Marcial v Sullivan, 296 AD2d 551 [2002]; Matter of Williams v Tillman, 289 AD2d 885 [2001]; Matter of Davis v Davis, 265 AD2d 552 [1999]).

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., Florio, S. Miller and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

309 A.D.2d 807, 765 N.Y.S.2d 796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodriquez-v-van-putten-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack