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 ROBERT H. ROTERING, JR., appellant, v. SUSAN C. ROTERING, respondent. (Docket Nos. V-06706-02/03A, V-06707-02/03A, V-06708-02/03A, V-06709-02/03A).

DECISION ORDER

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

When reviewing a custodial parent's request to relocate, the Family Court's primary focus must be the best interests of the children ( see Matter of Tropea v. Tropea, 87 N.Y.2d 727, 738-739; Kime v. Kime, 302 A.D.2d 564). Here, contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court properly dismissed his petition to relocate to Fargo, North Dakota, with the parties' children, for failure to establish, prima facie, that such relocation was in the best interests of the children.

SMITH, J.P., KRAUSMAN, CRANE and MASTRO, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

IN THE MATTER OF ROTERING v. ROTERING
(Apr 26, 2004)