Opinion
470 CAF 13-01932
05-01-2015
IN THE MATTER OF CANDIE A. FOSTER, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. ANDREW J. FOSTER, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.
PAUL M. DEEP, UTICA, FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT. COHEN & COHEN LLP, UTICA (RICHARD A. COHEN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. JOHN J. RASPANTE, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, UTICA.
PRESENT: , CARNI, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oneida County (Randal B. Caldwell, J.), entered October 11, 2013 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order denied the petition.
PAUL M. DEEP, UTICA, FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.
COHEN & COHEN LLP, UTICA (RICHARD A. COHEN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.
JOHN J. RASPANTE, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, UTICA.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Petitioner mother appeals from an order denying her petition, following a hearing, seeking to modify a prior custody order that, inter alia, granted primary physical custody of the subject child to respondent father. "A party seeking a change in an established custody arrangement must show a change in circumstances [that] reflects a real need for change to ensure the best interest[s] of the child" (Matter of Gross v Gross, 119 AD3d 1453, 1453 [internal quotation marks omitted]). Contrary to the mother's contention, we conclude that Family Court's determination that she failed to meet that burden has a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Rauch v Keller, 77 AD3d 1409, 1410).
Entered: May 1, 2015
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court