Reset A A Font size: Print

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

Matter of MICHAEL A.C., Jr., Petitioner-Respondent, v. KARI LYNN C., Respondent-Appellant.

Decided: September 22, 2006

PRESENT:  PIGOTT, JR., P.J., SCUDDER, KEHOE, SMITH, AND GREEN, JJ. Paul Skavina, Rome, for Respondent-Appellant. Peter J. DiGiorgio, Jr., Utica, for Petitioner-Respondent.

Petitioner commenced this proceeding alleging that respondent had interfered with his visitation rights.   Following a hearing, Family Court determined that respondent had willfully violated a prior order of visitation and imposed a jail term of three days, although the court suspended that sentence.   Contrary to respondent's contention, the determination that respondent willfully violated the prior order has “a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Stuttard v. Stuttard, 2 A.D.3d 1415, 1416, 768 N.Y.S.2d 902;  see Matter of Glenn v. Glenn, 262 A.D.2d 885, 886, 692 N.Y.S.2d 520, lv. dismissed in part and denied in part 94 N.Y.2d 782, 700 N.Y.S.2d 418, 722 N.E.2d 498;  Matter of Wright v. Wright, 205 A.D.2d 889, 891, 613 N.Y.S.2d 949).   Indeed, respondent admitted to the allegation that, on February 18 and 25, 2005, she interfered with the exercise of petitioner's right of visitation (see Wright, 205 A.D.2d at 891, 613 N.Y.S.2d 949).   Respondent testified at the hearing on the amended petition that she had informed petitioner in telephone conversations on those dates that she would not open the door to him when he arrived to pick up the children for visitation until he had complied with an order of discovery issued in a pending support matter.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.