Torres v. Cortes

2022 NY Slip Op 04174

In the Matter of Jose F. Torres, respondent, v. Priscilla Cortes, appellant. (Proceeding No. 1)

In the Matter of Priscilla Cortes, appellant, v. Jose F. Torres, respondent. (Proceeding No. 2)

No. 2020-08974, Docket Nos. V-9904-15, V-19321-15

Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

June 29, 2022

Anna Stern, Brooklyn, NY, for appellant.

Angella S. Hull, Jamaica, NY, for respondent.

Helene Chowes, New York, NY, attorney for the child.

COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P. BETSY BARROS ROBERT J. MILLER LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In related proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 6 the mother appeals from a final order of custody and visitation of the Family Court, Kings County (Judith Waksberg, J.), dated November 17, 2020. The order, after a hearing, in effect, granted the father's petition for sole legal and residential custody of the parties' child with parental access to the mother, and, in effect, denied the mother's petition for sole legal and residential custody of the child. The notice of appeal from an order dated November 16, 2020, is deemed to be a notice of appeal from the order dated November 17, 2020 (see CPLR 5512[a]).

ORDERED that the order dated November 17, 2020, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The parties, who were never married, are the parents of one child, born in 2014. The Family Court, in an order dated November 17, 2020, made after a hearing held over a span of four years, inter alia, in effect, granted the father's petition for sole residential and legal custody of the child, with parental access to the mother. The mother appeals.

The paramount consideration in making a custody determination is the best interests of the child (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 171). "In determining an initial petition for child custody, the court must consider, among other things, (1) which alternative will best promote stability; (2) the available home environments; (3) the past performance of each parent; (4) each parent's relative fitness, including his or her ability to guide the child, provide for the child's overall well being, and foster the child's relationship with the noncustodial parent; and (5) the child's desires" (Matter of Scott v Thompson, 166 A.D.3d 627, 628 [internal quotation marks omitted]). "Since custody determinations depend to a great extent upon an assessment of the character and credibility of the parties and witnesses, deference is accorded to the trial court's credibility findings, and such findings will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record" (Matter of Dolan v Masterson, 121 A.D.3d 979, 980).

Here the Family Court conducted a hearing at which it observed the demeanor and heard...