AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

In the Matter of BRIAN G. REILLY, Appellant-Respondent, v. CAROLE A. REILLY, Respondent-Appellant.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

One who seeks a change in visitation is not automatically entitled to a hearing but must make a sufficient evidentiary showing of a material change of circumstances to warrant a hearing ( see Matter of Rodriguez v Hangartner, 59 AD3d 630; Matter of Gold v Gold, 53 AD3d 485, 488; Matter of Walberg v Rudden, 14 AD3d 572; Matter of Steinharter v Steinharter, 11 AD3d 471; Matter of Brocher v Brocher, 213 AD2d 544). Contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court properly dismissed, without a hearing, his petition to modify the order of visitation ( see Matter of Walberg v Rudden, 14 AD3d at 572; Smoczkiewicz v Smoczkiewicz, 2 AD3d 705, 706; Matter of Ritchie v Waters, 1 AD3d 839, 840 ; Matter of Gerow v Gerow, 257 AD2d 718, 718-719; cf. Matter of Hermanowski v Hermanowski, 57 AD3d 777, 778; Matter of Vasquez-Williams v Williams, 32 AD3d 859, 859-860).

The Family Court properly denied that branch of the mother's motion which was for an award of an attorney's fee.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

REILLY v. REILLY
(Jul 14, 2009)