From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of McCarthy v. Braiman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 22, 1986
125 A.D.2d 572 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

December 22, 1986

Appeal from the Family Court, Dutchess County (Bernhard, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We cannot say that the findings of the Family Court were not supported by the credible evidence and that a different determination is warranted (Strauf v. Ettson Enters., 106 A.D.2d 737). The greatest deference should be given to the decision of the hearing Judge who is in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence proffered (Arnold v. State of New York, 108 A.D.2d 1021, appeal dismissed 65 N.Y.2d 723). Moreover, the petitioner's testimony is riddled with inconsistencies and it is clear that the daughter has been influenced by her mother's hostility towards the respondent since the daughter never informed the respondent of her move to Florida, never gave him her new address and did not even inform him of her upcoming marriage, much less invite him to her wedding.

The evidence indicates that the daughter has actively abandoned her father, the respondent herein, by her renunciation of his chosen religious affiliation, and of his surname (see, Cohen v Schnepf, 94 A.D.2d 783). Moreover, her behavior towards him whenever they would meet was so hostile as to justify his belief of her abandonment of him, and his desire to avoid the relationship in the future (see, Matter of Parker v. Stage, 43 N.Y.2d 128). Weinstein, J.P., Rubin, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of McCarthy v. Braiman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 22, 1986
125 A.D.2d 572 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Matter of McCarthy v. Braiman

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of SHARON McCARTHY, Appellant, v. ARTHUR BRAIMAN, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 22, 1986

Citations

125 A.D.2d 572 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

Matter of Villota v. Zelenak

The Hearing Examiner found that the child's animosity resulted from her father's lack of concern. Great…

Tina P. v. Craig B.

The weight to be accorded expert testimony is a matter for the trier of fact (see, Matter of Sylvestri, 44…