IN RE: JOHNATHAN S. (2026)

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Fiordaliza A. Rodriguez, J.), entered on or about January 26, 2023, which granted petitioner father and respondent mother joint legal and physical custody of the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

A sound and substantial basis in the record supports the court's determination that the child's best interests are met by awarding joint custody to the mother and father (see Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 171, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260 [1982]).  The court considered the relevant factors (see id. at 172–173, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260), and the evidence presented at the hearing supports the court's conclusion that both parents were fit.  The court appropriately fashioned a remedy which divided decision-making authority between the parents (see Matter of Michael L. v. Lillian G., 231 A.D.3d 541, 542, 218 N.Y.S.3d 330 [1st Dept. 2024]).  While the father points to facts which demonstrate his ability to parent, these facts do not warrant awarding the father sole custody as they do not establish the mother's lack of fitness.  We note that a prior finding of neglect against the mother is not necessarily a bar to her being awarded custody (see Matter of D.T. [A.G.], 226 A.D.3d 451, 452, 209 N.Y.S.3d 15 [1st Dept. 2024]).  That is especially true where, as here, the court addressed the mother's proactive and remedial measures put in place to address the circumstances which previously led to the child being removed.

As the mother did not cross-appeal, we do not consider her arguments for sole custody (see Svatovic v. Svatovic, 166 A.D.3d 484, 488, 89 N.Y.S.3d 36 [1st Dept. 2018], lv dismissed in part, denied in part 33 N.Y.3d 1062, 103 N.Y.S.3d 356, 127 N.E.3d 314 [2019]).

We have considered the father's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.