Opinion
2011-12-27
In the Matter of Shulem INDIG, respondent, v. Chaya INDIG, also known as Chaya Kenig, appellant.
Michael G. Paul, New City, N.Y., for appellant. Eric Ole Thorsen, New City, N.Y., for respondent.
Michael G. Paul, New City, N.Y., for appellant. Eric Ole Thorsen, New City, N.Y., for respondent.
Rachel Tanguay–McGuane, New City, N.Y., attorney for the children.
In a child visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of disposition of the Family Court, Rockland County (Warren, J.), entered December 17, 2010, as, after a hearing, directed her to ensure that, during visitation, the children abide by the rules of their respective Satmar Hasidic community schools whenever possible.
ORDERED that on the Court's own motion, the notice of appeal dated January 21, 2011, is deemed to be a notice of appeal by the mother ( see CPLR 2001; Matter of Tagliaferri v. Weiler, 1 N.Y.3d 605, 606, 775 N.Y.S.2d 753, 807 N.E.2d 864); and it is further,
ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The determination of visitation issues is entrusted to the sound discretion of the Family Court, and must be based upon the best interests of the child ( see Matter of Wiebke v. Wiebke, 77 A.D.3d 964, 964, 909 N.Y.S.2d 395; Matter of Ciccone v. Ciccone, 74 A.D.3d 1337, 1338, 904 N.Y.S.2d 203; Matter of Thompson v. Yu–Thompson, 41 A.D.3d 487, 488, 837 N.Y.S.2d 313). The Family Court's determination will not be set aside unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record ( see Matter of Larkin v. White, 79 A.D.3d 751, 751, 915 N.Y.S.2d 83; Matter of Wiebke v. Wiebke, 77 A.D.3d at 964, 909 N.Y.S.2d 395; Matter of Ciccone v. Ciccone, 74 A.D.3d at 1338, 904 N.Y.S.2d 203).
The Family Court's determination that it would be in the children's best interests to direct the mother to ensure that, during visitation, the children abide by the rules of their respective Satmar Hasidic community schools whenever possible has a sound and substantial basis in the record, which includes a stipulation entered into by the parties ( see Matter of Powell v. Blumenthal, 35 A.D.3d 615, 617, 827 N.Y.S.2d 187; Matter of Booth v. Booth, 8 A.D.3d 1104, 1106, 778 N.Y.S.2d 643; Lebovich v. Wilson, 155 A.D.2d 291, 291, 547 N.Y.S.2d 54; Matter of Bentley v. Bentley, 86 A.D.2d 926, 927, 448 N.Y.S.2d 559).
The parties' remaining contentions and those of the attorney for the children are without merit.