Custody

Published on: September 27, 2012

Court Affirms Previous Custody Arrangement

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a case being heard in the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. A New York Family Lawyer said the case involves the petitioner and appellant Angel M. and the respondent Nereida M. The order that is being appealed was made in the Supreme Court of Bronx County by Judge Diane Kiesel. The order granted a final order of custody to the respondent mother with visitation rights given to the petitioner father.

Case Discussion and Decision

When reviewing the records of the case the court finds that it was in the child’s best interest to award custody to the mother. A New York Custody Lawyer said the records show that the father tried to thwart any relationship the mother had with the child. The mother was willing to ensure that the father was given adequate time with the child.

Published on: September 16, 2012

Custody Awarded to Grandmother

by Stephen Bilkis

This case deals with Jessica W, Sandra A.H., et al as the petitioner and respondent. The respondent and appellant in the case is Josefina M. The appellant, Josefina M. is appealing an order that was made in the Family Court of Bronx County by Referee Peter Kuper. A New York Family Lawyer said the order granted the petition for custody of the subject child to the paternal grandmother and allowed visitation rights to the respondent mother.

Case Discussion and Decision

There were extraordinary circumstances that existed in this case and it is found that the Family Court of Bronx County properly determined that it was in the best interest of the child to grant custody to the petitioner, the paternal grandmother of the child.

Published on: September 15, 2012

Father Loses Parental Rights

by Stephen Bilkis

This case deals a dependent child under the age of eighteen years old. The respondent and appellant in the case is Frank G. The petitioner and respondent in the matter are the Catholic Guardian Society and Home Bureau.

A New York Family Lawyer said that Frank G. is appealing an order that was made in the Bronx County Family Court by Judge Carol Ann Stokinger. The order was entered around the 22nd of June, 2009 and determined that the respondent father had permanently neglected the child. The father’s parental rights were terminated by the order and custody of and guardianship of the child was given jointly to the New York City Commissioner of Social Services and the petitioner agency.

Case Discussion and Decision

Published on: September 13, 2012

Court Decides Visitation Rights Issue

by Stephen Bilkis

The matter before the court deals with support for a child under the Family Court Act, article 4. The respondent and appellant in the case is Dolores Schaefer Bolatin. The appellant and respondent in the matter is George Bolatin. The case is being heard in the court of appeals in New York.

Case Background

A New York Family Lawyer said the divorced wife, Dolores Schaefer Bolatin made an application in the Family Court of Bronx County to modify a judgment that was made in the Supreme Court of Nassau County. The judgment made in the Supreme Court of Nassau County granted the divorce and directed the ex-husband to pay the divorced wife $75 a week in support plus $17.50 each week for each of their two children. The order awarded custody of the children to the wife and the divorced husband received visitation rights.

Published on: September 10, 2012

Father Requests Modification of Child Support

by Stephen Bilkis

The parties were divorced pursuant to a judgment of divorce which was granted upon defendant’s (father) default. The Court with respect to the child custody and child support, ordered that plaintiff (mother) shall have custody of the child of marriage and that the father shall pay the Mother as and for the support of the parties’ child the sum of Two Hundred Ten dollars ($ 210.00) per week for child support, on Friday of each week thereafter, which shall be paid to through the Support Collection Unit for Kings County located at NYS Child Support Processing Center.

A New York Family Lawyer said the father, in his affidavit state, that after the divorce, their child resided with the maternal grandmother and other maternal relatives in Brooklyn. Thereafter, without his consent and Court approval, mother removed the child from the State of New York to Ontario, Canada. Father attempted to locate the child in Canada but the same was unsuccessful, so he filed a petition for visitation with the Kings County Family Court, but was unable to effectuate service of summons that resulted to the dismissal of the petition.

A New York Child Custody Lawyer said father’s counsel managed to acquire the name and address of the child’s school in Ontario, by securing said information from the child’s former school in Brooklyn. A New York Child Custody Lawyer said that father attempted to contact the school in order to gain access to the child, but to no avail because the school refused to give information about the mother and his child.

Published on: September 9, 2012

Court Decides Jurisdiction Issue

by Stephen Bilkis

The mother and the father, who were never married, had one child together who was born in New York. Two months after the child’s birth, the mother and the child resided in New York, while the father resided in Florida, the mother filed petitions in New York seeking an order of filiation and an order of child support, which relief was granted.

A New York Family Lawyer said that according to the father, the mother moved to Florida, and resided there continuously, at which time the father filed a petition in Florida seeking visitation. The Florida proceeding was dismissed, however, based upon the Florida court’s erroneous conclusion that the prior New York filiations proceeding deprived the Florida court of subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act. The father and the mother thereafter filed petitions in New York, where the mother and child were then residing, seeking, respectively, visitation and custody, but neither party informed the New York Court, as required, of the proceedings held in Florida.

Thereafter, a final order granting child custody to the mother and visitation to the father was entered upon the consent of the parties. A New York Custody Lawyer said the mother and the father subsequently filed several petitions in New York, to modify the final order of child custody and visitation, and the father also sought an order transferring jurisdiction of the matter to Florida.

Published on: September 7, 2012

Court Decides Petition for Relocation

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

Petitioner and respondent are the natural parents of a 7-year old child, born on 11 October 2002, who has lived continuously with the mother. The parties were never married and the mother is currently married to another. The mother also has a 1-year old daughter, born on 14 December 2008.

A New York Family Lawyer said the mother and father lived together for approximately three to four years before he left the household when the child was approximately three years old.

Published on: September 6, 2012

Court Examines Visitation Issue

by Stephen Bilkis

When the parties entered into their divorce settlement, the petitioner, the respondent and the child resided in Clinton County, New York. Petitioner has continued to reside in New York since the parties separated. Respondent relocated to the State of Connecticut approximately eight years ago. A New York Family Lawyer said that after the relocation, the parties arranged informally for the petitioner to visit with the child for an extended period in New York over the summer and during some of the child’s spring, winter Christmas school vacations. In July of 2008, respondent informed petitioner that if he wanted to exercise any visitation with the subject child he would have to come to Connecticut. The only explanation respondent gave petitioner for her new position was that the subject child has an attitude when she comes home and that petitioner and his family are a bad influence.

Petitioner filed a Petition seeking the modification of the parties’ New York State Judgment of Divorce dated February 25, 1999, regarding petitioner’s visitation with the parties’ child. The respondent filed a Notice of Motion seeking the dismissal of petitioner’s petition arguing that the State of New York (where the petitioner resides) lacks exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over custody proceedings concerning this child. In the alternative, respondent requests that this Court decline jurisdiction in favor of Connecticut (where she and the child reside).

Respondent alleged that in the eight years that he and the child have resided in Connecticut, petitioner’s visitation has been sporadic, averaging approximately three weeks in the summer with an additional week during the year over the last three years. In at least two of the years since the child moved to Connecticut, the visitation has been a total of less than one week. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the overwhelming evidence concerning the child’s care, protection, training and personal relationships is in the State of Connecticut and that it would be very inconvenient for the child and respondent to litigate the matter in New York.

Published on: September 4, 2012

Court Discusses Social Services Law

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

The subject child was born on 30 October 2000 and was placed in the care and custody of the Administration for Children’s Services (hereinafter ACS) in February 2002 as a result of neglect allegations against her mother, the appellant (hereinafter the mother). Sometime in June 2002, the mother also gave birth to a son who is not the subject of this proceeding but was also placed in a separate foster care home soon after his birth.

A New York Family Lawyer said after the commencement of the aforesaid neglect proceeding, ACS placed the subject child with New Alternatives for Children, Inc. (hereinafter NAC), a New York-authorized foster care agency. NAC placed the child in the non-kinship foster home of a foster mother (hereinafter the foster mother).

Published on: September 1, 2012

Court Rules on Petition to Relocate Child

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a case where the court granted defendant mother’s motion for relocation to North Carolina with her ten year old daughter alleging that the circumstances have changed.

Because her parents’ marriage had failed even before she was conceived, the subject child has been raised by her mother since birth. The defendant is and has always been a good and devoted mother to the child.

A New York Family Lawyer said the child’s mother had struggled to make ends meet in New York, taking on as many as three jobs at once while attempting to make a home for her child. For most of her life in New York, the child lived in a home consisted of a shared room with her mother in a house owned and occupied by another family. Due to the damage to the house, mother and child were forced to move into a home with the child’s maternal aunt where living conditions were cramped and crowded.