Walker v. Diaz

95 A.D.3d 1225, 943 N.Y.S.2d 913
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 23, 2012
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 95 A.D.3d 1225 (Walker v. Diaz) 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
Walker v. Diaz, 95 A.D.3d 1225, 943 N.Y.S.2d 913 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (IDV Part) (Morgenstern, J.), dated June 7, 2010, which, sua sponte, suspended his visitation with the subject child.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County (IDV Part), for further proceedings on the issue of visitation consistent with the child’s best interest.

‘A noncustodial parent is entitled to meaningful visitation. Denial of that right is so drastic that it must be based on substantial evidence that visitation would be detrimental to the welfare of the child’ ” (Matter of Pettiford-Brown v Brown, 42 AD3d 541, 542 [2007], quoting Matter of Kachelhofer v Wasiak, 10 AD3d 366, 366 [2004]). When adjudicating visitation issues, a court must determine the best interests of the child (see Matter of Indig v Indig, 90 AD3d 1050, 1051 [2011]; Matter of Mohabir v Singh, 78 AD3d 1056 [2010]; Matter of Mera v Rodri[1226]*1226guez, 73 AD3d 1069, 1069-1070 [2010]; Matter of Thompson v Yu-Thompson, 41 AD3d 487, 488 [2007]).

Here, the Supreme Court failed to determine the best interests of the child before suspending the father’s visitation with the child. Accordingly, the matter must be remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County (IDV Part), for further proceedings on the issue of visitation consistent with the child’s best interests. Rivera, J.R, Chambers, Roman and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Matter of Dillon O. B. v. McLaren
133 A.D.3d 743 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Lew v. Lew
104 A.D.3d 946 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
95 A.D.3d 1225, 943 N.Y.S.2d 913, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walker-v-diaz-nyappdiv-2012.