Waturo A. v. Michiko A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Waturo A. v. Michiko A.

160 A.D.2d 197

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

DecidedApril 3, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 160 A.D.2d 197 (Waturo A. v. Michiko A.) 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

Waturo A. v. Michiko A., 160 A.D.2d 197 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Family Court, New York County (Ruth Jane Zuckerman, J.), entered on or about December 15, 1988, which transferred custody of Wataru A. from his natural mother to his natural father and granted liberal visitation to the mother, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The paramount concern in a custody dispute is the best interest of the child (Domestic Relations Law § 70; Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 NY2d 89). Contrary to respondent’s contentions, the testimony at the hearing and reports of the psychologist and social worker support the court’s finding that respondent’s mental state had adversely affected the child’s psychological and social growth. The court properly considered the abilities of each parent to provide for the emotional, intellectual and financial needs of the child (Matter of Nehra v Uhlar, 43 NY2d 242; O’Connor v O’Connor, 146 AD2d 909, 910). Concur—Ross, J. P., Carro, Asch and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Order, Family Court, New York County (Ruth Jane Zuckerman, J.), entered on or about December 15, 1988, which transferred custody of Wataru A. from his natural mother to his natural father and granted liberal visitation to the mother, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The paramount concern in a custody dispute is the best interest of the child (Domestic Relations Law § 70; Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 NY2d 89). Contrary to respondent’s contentions, the testimony at the hearing and reports of the psychologist and social worker support the court’s finding that respondent’s mental state had adversely affected the child’s psychological and social growth. The court properly considered the abilities of each parent to provide for the emotional, intellectual and financial needs of the child (Matter of Nehra v Uhlar, 43 NY2d 242; O’Connor v O’Connor, 146 AD2d 909, 910). Concur—Ross, J. P., Carro, Asch and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 A.D.2d 197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waturo-a-v-michiko-a-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack