Christopher J.S. v. Colleen A.B.
Cases that cite this one
10 later published cases cite this decision.
- MOREDOCK, SAMANTHA J. v. CONTI, ANTHONY T. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Matter of Robinson v. Santiago (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2024)
- Benedict v. Benedict (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- Matter of Valentin v. Mendez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- Matter of Kleinbach v. Cullerton (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- WILLIAMS, KEITH v. v. WILLIAMS, TAWNY B. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Williams v. Williams (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Williams v. Williams (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Parish A. v. Jamie T. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- Betro v. Carbone (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Niagara County (John F. Batt, J.), entered August 8, 2006 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order granted sole custody of the parties’ child to petitioner and visitation to respondent.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Respondent mother appeals from an order modifying an order of joint custody by granting sole custody of the parties’ child to petitioner father. We affirm. Family Court’s determination “must be accorded great deference . . . and should not be disturbed where, as here, it is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Green v Mitchell, 266 AD2d 884 [1999]). The court was “in the best position to evaluate the character and credibility of the witnesses” (Matter of Nunnery v Nunnery, 275 AD2d 986, 987 [2000]), and we see no reason to disturb the court’s determination that it was in the best interests of the child to award sole custody to the father (see generally Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 171 [1982]). Contrary to the mother’s contention, the record supports the court’s determination that joint custody is inap
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.