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 LEE ANN RIEDEL, Appellant, v. PAUL RIEDEL, Respondent.

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

Contrary to the mother's contention, the Supreme Court properly denied, without a hearing, her petition to modify the visitation provisions of the Florida judgment of divorce. "Modification of an existing custody or visitation arrangement is permissible only upon a showing that there has been a change in circumstances such that a modification is necessary to ensure the continued best interests and welfare of the child" ( Matter of Molinari v Tuthill, 59 AD3d 722, 723; see Matter of Shockome v Shockome, 53 AD3d 618, 619). A person seeking a change in visitation is not automatically entitled to a hearing, but must make an evidentiary showing sufficient to warrant a hearing ( see Matter of Rodriguez v Hangartner, 59 AD3d 630; Matter of Mennuti v Berry, 59 AD3d 625; Matter of Hermanowski v Hermanowski, 57 AD3d 777, 778). Here, the mother failed to make an evidentiary showing of a subsequent change in circumstances sufficient to warrant a hearing.

The mother's remaining contentions are without merit.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

RIEDEL v. RIEDEL
(Apr 28, 2009)