RICHARD SR v. HELEN (2007)

 Family Court properly granted the petition seeking to modify the parties' existing custody arrangement by transferring sole custody of the parties' youngest child from respondent to petitioner, with visitation to respondent.   The court's determination that an award of sole custody to petitioner is in the best interests of the child is entitled to great deference and will not be disturbed where, as here, it has a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Westfall v. Westfall, 28 A.D.3d 1229, 1230, 813 N.Y.S.2d 623, lv. denied 7 N.Y.3d 706, 819 N.Y.S.2d 873, 853 N.E.2d 244;   Sorce v. Sorce, 16 A.D.3d 1077, 793 N.Y.S.2d 304;  Matter of Thayer v. Ennis, 292 A.D.2d 824, 825, 739 N.Y.S.2d 321).   We conclude that respondent is less fit than petitioner as a parent (see Thayer, 292 A.D.2d at 825, 739 N.Y.S.2d 321;  Matter of Quarantillo v. Grainge, 272 A.D.2d 994, 708 N.Y.S.2d 782), particularly in view of the evidence at the hearing on the petition that respondent allowed the child to have contact with a convicted sex offender.   We further conclude that respondent is less able than petitioner to provide for the child's stability and physical, medical, educational, moral, and emotional well-being (see Matter of Vincent A.B. v. Karen T., 30 A.D.3d 1100, 1102, 816 N.Y.S.2d 637, lv. denied 7 N.Y.3d 711, 823 N.Y.S.2d 770, 857 N.E.2d 65;  Matter of Pinkerton v. Pensyl, 305 A.D.2d 1113, 1114, 757 N.Y.S.2d 921;  Matter of Autumn R.F. v. Randy R.P., 255 A.D.2d 910, 911, 680 N.Y.S.2d 183).

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM: