Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Keisha RUST, appellant, v. Michael DOSSANTOS, respondent. (Proceeding No. 1).
IN RE: Michael Dossantos, respondent, v. Keisha Rust, appellant. (Proceeding No. 2).
In related child custody proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Duffy, J.), entered July 21, 2004, as amended by an order of the same court entered September 13, 2004, as, after a hearing, awarded custody of the parties' children to the father and, upon her consent, granted her supervised visitation.
ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order, as amended, as granted the mother supervised visitation is dismissed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order, as amended, is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
The appeal from so much of the order, as amended, as granted the mother supervised visitation must be dismissed, since the mother admittedly consented to supervised visitation (see Matter of Kristina R., 21 A.D.3d 560, 562, 800 N.Y.S.2d 454, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 717, 808 N.Y.S.2d 141, 842 N.E.2d 27; Matter of Kayla M., 295 A.D.2d 613, 614, 744 N.Y.S.2d 696).
Contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court's determination to award custody to the father is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record and should not be disturbed (see Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 174, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260; Matter of Timosa v. Chase, 21 A.D.3d 1115, 1116, 803 N.Y.S.2d 575; Neuman v. Neuman, 19 A.D.3d 383, 384, 796 N.Y.S.2d 403).
The mother's remaining contentions are without merit.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: April 11, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)