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: Tammy SHAW, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Frank CANNATA, Respondent-Respondent.
Petitioner mother contends that Family Court erred in failing to conduct a hearing before modifying a prior custody order by altering her visitation rights when she in fact sought a change of custody. We agree. The record establishes that the mother sought a change of custody based upon allegations of a volatile relationship between the parties' 16-year-old son and respondent father. Based upon the allegations in the petition, the court ordered that an investigation be conducted by Child Protective Services (CPS) pursuant to Family Court Act § 1034. The court did not grant the motion of the Law Guardian to dismiss the petition prior to receiving the report from CPS but, rather, modified the prior order with respect to the mother's visitation rights upon the oral request of the father. We conclude that the mother made a sufficient evidentiary showing of a change of circumstances to warrant a hearing (cf. Jean v. Jean, 59 A.D.3d 599, 600, 875 N.Y.S.2d 88), and that the mother was thereby denied her opportunity to prove that it is in the best interests of the child to modify the order of custody by awarding custody to her (see generally Matter of Lisa B.I. v. Carl D.I., 46 A.D.3d 1451, 848 N.Y.S.2d 462). We therefore reverse the order and remit the matter to Family Court for a hearing on the petition.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the matter is remitted to Family Court, Erie County, for a hearing on the petition.
MEMORANDUM:
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: July 02, 2009
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)