Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Family Court did not err in dismissing the petition alleging that Richard Palacz (respondent) violated the visitation provisions of a prior order by his conduct on January 7, 1997. Under the circumstances, no hearing was required (see, Bowie v. Bowie, 182 A.D.2d 1049, 1050). We agree with the court's conclusion that the single alleged violation apparently arising from a conflict between the visitation schedule and the child's academic needs, if established, would be too insubstantial to support the conclusion that respondent "defeated, impaired, impeded, or prejudiced" petitioner's visitation rights (Judiciary Law § 753 [A]) and thus would not warrant the imposition of sanctions. The court's admonition to respondent was sufficient in this instance.