Opinion
2001-09370
Submitted January 30, 2003.
February 24, 2003.
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (O'Rourke, J.), dated September 28, 2001, as denied his motion for joint custody of the parties' daughter, and the defendant cross-appeals from so much of the same order as denied her motion for permission to relocate with the parties' daughter to Florida.
Daniel D. Molinoff, Larchmont, N.Y., for appellant-respondent.
Kral, Clerkin, Redmond, Ryan, Perry Girvan, Mineola, N.Y. (Elizabeth Gelfand Kastner of counsel), for respondent-appellant.
Before: NANCY E. SMITH, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, SANDRA L. TOWNES, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
When reviewing a custodial parent's request to relocate, the court's primary focus must be on the best interests of the child (see Tropea v. Tropea, 87 N.Y.2d 727, 739; Miller v. Pipia, 297 A.D.2d 362; Reilly v. Schmidt, 295 A.D.2d 436). Here, contrary to the defendant's contentions, the record provides a sound and substantial basis for the Supreme Court's determination that the defendant should remain in New York and not relocate to Florida with the parties' daughter.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying his motion for joint custody (see Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167; Tesler v. Tesler, 228 A.D.2d 491; Forzano v. Scuderi, 224 A.D.2d 385; Matter of Laura A.K. v. Timothy M., 204 A.D.2d 325).
The parties' remaining contentions are without merit.
SMITH, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.