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.
Albert R. SCHNEIDER, respondent, v. Kristen M. SCHNEIDER, appellant.
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Bivona, J.), entered June 27, 2006, as, after a nonjury trial, awarded sole custody of the subject child to the plaintiff.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The essential consideration in making an award of custody is the best interests of the child (see Friederwitzer v. Friederwitzer, 55 N.Y.2d 89, 447 N.Y.S.2d 893, 432 N.E.2d 765; Matter of Canazon v. Canazon, 215 A.D.2d 652, 628 N.Y.S.2d 327; Alanna M. v. Duncan M., 204 A.D.2d 409, 611 N.Y.S.2d 886). A custody determination after a trial is largely based upon an assessment of the parties' credibility with reference to their character, temperament, and sincerity, and should not be set aside unless lacking sound and substantial support in the record (see Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 171, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260; Allain v. Allain, 35 A.D.3d 513, 826 N.Y.S.2d 411; Matter of Perez v. Montanez, 31 A.D.3d 565, 817 N.Y.S.2d 677).
The Supreme Court properly considered numerous factors in awarding custody of the subject child to the plaintiff, including a finding that the defendant had interfered with visitation, which was not in the child's best interests (see Cuccurullo v. Cuccurullo, 21 A.D.3d 983, 801 N.Y.S.2d 360; Matter of Greene v. Gordon, 7 A.D.3d 528, 776 N.Y.S.2d 73; Matter of Plaza v. Plaza, 305 A.D.2d 607, 759 N.Y.S.2d 368; Young v. Young, 212 A.D.2d 114, 119, 628 N.Y.S.2d 957).
Sitting as trier of fact, the court had the opportunity to view the demeanor of the witnesses and was in the best position to gauge their credibility (see Koeth v. Koeth, 309 A.D.2d 786, 765 N.Y.S.2d 640). We see no basis to disturb the court's resolution of issues of credibility (see Lieberman v. Lieberman, 21 A.D.3d 1004, 1005, 801 N.Y.S.2d 382; Matter of Sosa v. Sosa, 13 A.D.3d 638, 786 N.Y.S.2d 350).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
Thank you for your feedback!
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: May 22, 2007
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)