DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff's motion, inter alia, to direct that the former husband's visitation with the parties' minor children be supervised was based solely on unsupported hearsay allegations regarding the defendant's alleged unfitness to have unsupervised visitation. Thus, the Family Court properly denied that branch of the motion since the plaintiff failed to establish that unsupervised visitation would be detrimental to the children's well being ( see Matter of Graves v. Smith, 264 A.D.2d 844; Matter of Gerald D. v. Lucille S., 188 A.D.2d 650).
However, we note that in the future the Supreme Court should not conduct an in camera interview of a minor in the absence of the Law Guardian ( see Dwyer v. DeLa Torre, 252 A.D.2d 695).
The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.
ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, H. MILLER and COZIER, JJ., concur.