Opinion
12-21-2016
In the Matter of Jennifer POLLARO, respondent, v. Kevin H. KEENER, appellant.
Richard N. Lentino, Middletown, NY, for appellant. Edward C. Bruno, Pine Bush, NY, for respondent.
Richard N. Lentino, Middletown, NY, for appellant.
Edward C. Bruno, Pine Bush, NY, for respondent.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, and COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.
Appeal by the father from an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Debra J. Kiedaisch, J.), entered December 30, 2015. The order, after a hearing, in effect, granted the mother's petition to modify a prior order of custody and visitation of that court, entered March 7, 2011, so as to award her sole legal and physical custody of the subject children.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Family Court did not err in granting the mother's petition to modify a prior order of custody and visitation so as to award her sole legal and physical custody of the parties' two children. The parties previously shared joint custody of the children, but their relationship has deteriorated to the point where joint custody is no longer appropriate (see Martin v. Martin, 139 A.D.3d 916, 33 N.Y.S.3d 303 ; Matter of Moore v. Gonzalez, 134 A.D.3d 718, 21 N.Y.S.3d 292 ). The mother demonstrated that, under the totality of the circumstances, a transfer of custody to her alone was in the best interests of the children. There is no basis to disturb the court's determination that the father's testimony was not credible (see Matter of Fargasch v. Alves, 116 A.D.3d 774, 983 N.Y.S.2d 607 ). The court considered the relevant factors in determining the best interests of the children, including the quality of the home environment and the parental guidance the custodial parent provides for the children, the ability of each parent to provide for the children's emotional and intellectual development, the financial status and ability of each parent to provide for the children, the overall relative fitness of the parties, and the willingness of the custodial parent to assure meaningful contact between the children and the other parent (see Matter of Vasquez v. Ortiz, 77 A.D.3d 962, 909 N.Y.S.2d 155 ; Matter of McGovern v. Lynch, 62 A.D.3d 712, 712, 879 N.Y.S.2d 490 ; Matter of Bowe v. Robinson, 23 A.D.3d 555, 805 N.Y.S.2d 91 ). The court also gave appropriate weight to the expressed wishes of the children, whose ages and maturity make their input particularly meaningful (see Cook v. Cook, 142 A.D.3d 530, 36 N.Y.S.3d 222 ; Matter of Bowe v. Robinson, 23 A.D.3d at 557, 805 N.Y.S.2d 91 ).