Saylor v. Bukowski

170 A.D.3d 862

96 N.Y.S.3d 119

In the Matter of Adam SAYLOR, Respondent,

v.Joyelle BUKOWSKI, Appellant.

2018-05995

Docket No. V-4172-17

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Submitted—February 19, 2019

March 13, 2019

Joyelle Bukowski, Coram, NY, appellant pro se.

Mary Beth Daniels, Sound Beach, NY, attorney for the child.

RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, HECTOR D. LASALLE, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Matthew G. Hughes, J.), dated March 23, 2018. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted the father's petition for sole custody of the parties' child.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The parties, who were never married, have one child, born in 2012. For approximately the first three years of the child's life, the mother was the child's primary caregiver and permitted the father very limited contact with the child. In 2015, the father filed a parental access petition in the Family Court. In July 2015, the parties entered into a temporary stipulation of settlement wherein the father would have parental access three days a week. However, the mother failed to comply with the parental access schedule. Moreover, the mother made several false allegations that the father had physically and sexually abused the child. By making the false allegations, the mother exposed the child to unnecessary, invasive medical examinations and interrogations. On March 16, 2017, the father filed a petition for sole custody of the child. After a hearing, the court granted the petition, and the mother appeals.

"The paramount concern in any custody ... determination is the best interests of the child, under the totality of the circumstances" ( Matter of James M. v. Kevin M. , 99 A.D.3d 911, 912–913, 952 N.Y.S.2d 257 ; see Eschbach v. Eschbach , 56 N.Y.2d 167, 171, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260 ). "The factors to be considered in making a custody determination include the parental guidance provided by the custodial parent, each parent's ability to provide for the child's emotional and intellectual development, each parent's ability to provide for the child financially, the relative fitness of each parent, and the effect an award of custody to one parent might have on the child's relationship with the other parent" ( Matter of Maraj v. Gordon , 102 A.D.3d 698, 698, 957 N.Y.S.2d 717 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Estrada v. Palacios , 148 A.D.3d 804, 50 N.Y.S.3d 292 ). "Where, as here, a complete evidentiary hearing has been held on the issue of custody, any determination depends to a great extent upon the hearing court's assessment of the credibility of the witnesses and of the character, temperament, and sincerity of the parties. The credibility findings of the Family Court will be accorded great weight and its determinations regarding custody and [parental access] will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record" ( Matter of Felty v. Felty , 108 A.D.3d 705, 707, 969 N.Y.S.2d 557 [citations omitted]; see Matter of Gooler v. Gooler , 107 A.D.3d 712, 713, 966 N.Y.S.2d 208 ).

Here, the Family Court's determination awarding sole...