AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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
Attorney(S)
Judges

In the Matter of DANIEL W. DOBBINS, respondent, v. NANCY VARTABEDIAN, appellant.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith; and it is further,

ORDERED that the father shall retain custody pending a new determination.

It is axiomatic that custody determinations are to be made upon consideration of all relevant circumstances to reach the disposition that promotes the best interests of the child (see,Domestic Relations Law § 70[a]; Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167 ; Friederwitzer v. Friederwitzer, 55 N.Y.2d 89, 93-95 ; Matter of DiMedio v. DiMedio, 233 A.D.2d 394 ).

The Family Court properly concluded, after a hearing, that the mother wilfully and repeatedly deprived the father of his rights to visitation with his child and therefore was in contempt of court for violating the order dated January 26, 1999, directing that the father have visitation (see, Gagliardo v. Gagliardo, 151 A.D.2d 718, 720 ). However, the hearing in this proceeding was insufficient to determine the best interests of the child. Accordingly, the order awarding custody to the father must be reversed and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Suffolk County for such a hearing.

MANGANO, P.J., BRACKEN, LUCIANO, and SMITH, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF DOBBINS v. VARTABEDIAN
(Mar 9, 2000)