DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the appeal from the order dated March 5, 2003, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated June 26, 2003, made upon reargument; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order dated June 26, 2003, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the mother.
Contrary to the father's contention, the Supreme Court properly denied, without a hearing, his petition, in effect, for unsupervised visitation with his child. One who seeks to modify an existing order of visitation is not automatically entitled to a hearing, but must make some evidentiary showing sufficient to warrant it ( see Matter of Goldberg v. Goldberg, 300 A.D.2d 585; Matter of Gerow v. Gerow, 257 A.D.2d 718). Here, the father failed to provide any evidence to demonstrate a change of circumstances which would warrant unsupervised rather than supervised visitation.
The parties' remaining contentions are without merit.
ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, H. MILLER and COZIER, JJ., concur.