IN RE: A.K. (2026)

Order on custody and visitation, Family Court, Bronx County (Judith D. Waksberg, J.), entered on or about December 8, 2025, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, after a hearing, awarded sole legal and physical custody of the subject child to petitioner mother, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from fact-finding order, same court and Judge, entered on or about December 8, 2025, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the final order on custody and visitation.

There is a sound and substantial basis in the record for Family Court's determination that visitation with the father would not be in the best interests of the subject child (see Matter of Stanley G.M. v. Ivette B., 181 AD3d 434, 435 [1st Dept 2020]). As the court noted, it previously granted the mother's petition for an order of protection, finding that the father committed several family offenses, some of which were witnessed by the child, a decision that was affirmed by this Court (Matter of A.K. v. P.C., 244 AD3d 417 [1st Dept 2025]). The court properly considered the effects of these family offenses on the child as part of its best interests of the child analysis (see Domestic Relations Law § 240[1][a]). The father's persistent denial that he did anything wrong, his claim that it was the mother who had hurt him, his denial of anger issues, and his failure to participate in abusive partner intervention and anger management programs further support the court's determination (see Matter of Mohamed Z.G. v. Mairead P.M., 129 AD3d 516, 517 [1st Dept 2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 906 [2015]).

While not, as the father contends, treating it as dispositive, the court properly took into consideration the nine-year-old child's expressed wish, in an in-camera interview, not to have any visitation with the father (see Matter of Damien W.C. v. Melissa S., 242 AD3d 407, 408 [1st Dept 2025]; Matter of Stanley G.M. v. Ivette B., 181 AD3d 434, 434–35 [1st Dept 2020]).