DUBE v. DUBE

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Matter of Deborah J. DUBE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Patrick B. DUBE, Respondent-Respondent.

Decided: March 31, 1999

Present:  DENMAN, P.J., GREEN, PINE, HAYES and HURLBUTT, JJ. Michael A. Lacagnina,Monroe County Public Defender's Office, Rochester, for petitioner-appellant. Paul T. Missal, Missal, Trotto & Barry, Rochester, for respondent-respondent. Elizabeth Ann Sammons, Webster, Law Guardian.

“The court's determination regarding custody * * *, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record (see, Paul G. v. Donna G., 175 A.D.2d 236, 237 [572 N.Y.S.2d 364];  D'Errico v. D'Errico, 158 A.D.2d 503, 504 [551 N.Y.S.2d 266];  Lenczycki v. Lenczycki, 152 A.D.2d 621, 623 [543 N.Y.S.2d 724] )” (Matter of Samuel L.J. v. Sherry H., 206 A.D.2d 886, 616 N.Y.S.2d 312, lv. denied 84 N.Y.2d 810, 621 N.Y.S.2d 520, 645 N.E.2d 1220).   The record supports Family Court's determination that the parties' acrimonious relationship and inability to communicate in a civil manner warranted a change from joint custody to sole custody (see, Matter of Marino v. Marino, 240 A.D.2d 954, 955, 659 N.Y.S.2d 335;  Matter of Taber v. Taylor, 238 A.D.2d 696, 697, 656 N.Y.S.2d 408) and that the best interests of the child will be served by awarding sole custody to respondent (see generally, Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 171, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260;  Matter of Williams v. Williams, 188 A.D.2d 906, 907, 591 N.Y.S.2d 872).

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM: