From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wodka v. Wodka

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 21, 1990
168 A.D.2d 1000 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

December 21, 1990

Appeal from the Erie County Family Court, O'Donnell, J.

Present — Denman, J.P., Boomer, Pine, Davis and Lowery, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs and matter remitted to Erie County Family Court for further proceedings, in accordance with the following memorandum: It was an abuse of discretion for the court to award permanent custody of the parties' child to the father without conducting a factual hearing to determine the fundamental issue of the best interests of the child (Ideman v. Ideman, 168 A.D.2d 1001 [decided herewith]; Mosesku v. Mosesku, 108 A.D.2d 795; Matter of Blake v. Blake, 106 A.D.2d 916). We find no merit to the father's contention that the court's summary resolution of the custody issue was proper because the mother willfully refused to obey a court order to return to New York following her relocation with the child to Oregon. Although not necessary to our determination, we note that the court was without authority to compel the mother to return to New York and that she complied with that part of the order that directed the return of the child. In any event, defiance of a court order is but one factor to be considered when determining the relative fitness of the parties and what custody arrangement is in the child's best interest (see, Friederwitzer v. Friederwitzer, 55 N.Y.2d 89, 94; Matter of Nehra v. Uhlar, 43 N.Y.2d 242, 251). Accordingly, we reverse the order and remit the matter for a custody hearing to be conducted by a different Judge (see, Matter of Blake v. Blake, supra, at 916-917). Physical custody is to be continued with the father pending the determination of permanent custody (see, Mosesku v. Mosesku, supra).


Summaries of

Wodka v. Wodka

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 21, 1990
168 A.D.2d 1000 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Wodka v. Wodka

Case Details

Full title:JAMES P. WODKA, Respondent, v. HELEN WODKA, Appellant. JAMES WODKA…

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

Date published: Dec 21, 1990

Citations

168 A.D.2d 1000 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Citing Cases

Wiles v. Wiles

We further note that during the bifurcated hearing, Family Court stated that it did not consider the best…

Tarrant v. Ostrowski

The remaining issue is whether the court erred in determining that the change of custody to the father was in…