Ordered that the appeal from the decision is dismissed, as no appeal lies from a decision (see, Schicchi v. Green Constr. Corp., 100 A.D.2d 509); and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated June 15, 1998, is reversed, as a matter of discretion, and the husband's motion is denied; and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated September 2, 1998, is reversed, on the law, and the husband's motion for temporary custody of the parties' children is denied; and it is further,
Ordered that the appellant is awarded one bill of costs.
The court improvidently exercised its discretion by directing Alfred Reinharz, Esq., the Law Guardian who had represented all three children, to represent one child and appointing two new Law Guardians to represent the parties' two other children. There is no evidence in the record that Mr. Reinharz either had a conflict of interest or had failed to diligently represent the best interests of the children (Matter of Zirkind v. Zirkind, 218 A.D.2d 745).
In seeking a change of custody, the initial burden is on the petitioner to show sufficient evidence of a change of circumstances warranting a hearing (Matter of Miller v. Lee, 225 A.D.2d 778). Consequently, the failure to adduce any evidence justifying a hearing will result in dismissal of the petition (Matter of Ann C. v. Debra S., 221 A.D.2d 338). The court erred in failing to dismiss the father's petition to change custody and instead granting the father temporary custody since he did not allege a sufficient change of circumstances to even warrant a hearing on the issue (see, Matter of Ann C. v. Debra S., supra; cf., LaBombardi v. LaBombardi, 247 A.D.2d 590).
Mangano, P. J., Friedmann, McGinity and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.