From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of King v. King

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 18, 1996
225 A.D.2d 697 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

March 18, 1996

Appeal from the Family Court, Putnam County (Braatz, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We find no basis to disturb the Family Court's award of custody of the child to the father. In determining custody, the paramount issue to be considered by the court is the best interests of the child (see, Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 N.Y.2d 89; Kuncman v Kuncman, 188 A.D.2d 517, 518). Furthermore, the determination of custody depends to a great extent on the court's assessment of the credibility of the witnesses and the character, temperament, and sincerity of the parties (see, Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167; Kuncman v Kuncman, supra). Since the hearing court is in the most advantageous position to evaluate the witnesses' testimony, its findings should generally be accorded great respect on appeal (see, Eschbach v Eschbach, supra).

The Family Court weighed the appropriate factors and properly awarded custody to the father in this case. The record supports the Family Court's findings that the mother, in a significant number of instances, interfered with the father's visitation rights, which upset the child. The father, on the other hand, did not interfere with the transfers of the child between the parents.

The Family Court properly determined that the mother's anger and hostility toward the father interfered with her own expressed wish to place the best interests of her son before her own need to express her hostility. Thus, she was unable to foster an ongoing relationship between the child and the father as the noncustodial parent (see, Janecka v Franklin, 150 A.D.2d 755, 757; Setty v Koeneke, 148 A.D.2d 520, 521-522). Although the mother presented convincing evidence of a loving relationship between herself and her son, the extensive testimony of the witnesses, as well as the findings and recommendations of the Law Guardian, support the Family Court's determination that the father is better able than the mother to place the child's needs before his own needs and to foster an ongoing relationship between the child and the noncustodial parent (see, e.g., Lohmiller v Lohmiller, 140 A.D.2d 497, 498).

We have reviewed the mother's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Miller, J.P., Pizzuto, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of King v. King

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 18, 1996
225 A.D.2d 697 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Matter of King v. King

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of KEVIN N. KING, Respondent, v. MARGARET M. KING, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 18, 1996

Citations

225 A.D.2d 697 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
639 N.Y.S.2d 465

Citing Cases

Flores v. Mark

Thus, joint custody was no longer an appropriate arrangement in this case ( see Bliss v. Ach, 56 N.Y.2d 995,…

Williams v. Norfleet

A parent seeking a change of custody is not automatically entitled to a hearing but must make some…