Vann v. Vann

187 A.D.2d 821, 589 N.Y.S.2d 715, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12854
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 12, 1992
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 187 A.D.2d 821 (Vann v. Vann) 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
Vann v. Vann, 187 A.D.2d 821, 589 N.Y.S.2d 715, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12854 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Tompkins County (Barrett, J.), entered January 6, 1992, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, to find respondent in violation of a prior order of visitation.

Petitioner commenced this proceeding claiming that, as a result of a prior order of Family Court, he is entitled to visitation with his two children. Without indicating its reason therefor, Family Court dismissed the petition on its own motion. Although petitioner is incarcerated, this fact, standing alone, does not mean that petitioner’s right to visitation should automatically be forfeited (see, Matter of Wise v Del Toro, 122 AD2d 714; Matter of R. J. v D. J., 133 Misc 2d 883, 884). Rather, because it is presumed that visitation is in a child’s best interest (see, Matter of Nathaniel T., 97 AD2d 973, 974) and the denial thereof is a drastic measure (see, Janousek v Janousek, 108 AD2d 782, 784), visitation will only be denied where there is substantial evidence that it would be detrimental to the child’s welfare (see, Weiss v Weiss, 52 NY2d 170, 175). As Family Court denied petitioner the opportunity to present evidence regarding his right to visitation, the matter must be remitted to that court for a hearing (see, Matter of Wise v Del Toro, supra).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs, and matter remitted to the Family Court of Tompkins County for further proceedings not inconsistent with this Court’s decision.

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

Related

In re Tristram K.
25 A.D.3d 222 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Trombley v. Trombley
301 A.D.2d 890 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Nelson M. v. Rebecca P.
187 Misc. 2d 921 (NYC Family Court, 2001)
McCrone v. Parker
265 A.D.2d 757 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Folsom v. Folsom
262 A.D.2d 875 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Vann v. Vann
205 A.D.2d 897 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
McSparron v. McSparron
190 A.D.2d 74 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
187 A.D.2d 821, 589 N.Y.S.2d 715, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12854, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vann-v-vann-nyappdiv-1992.