AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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

CATHERINE DE PINTO, Respondent, v. MICHELE DE PINTO, Appellant.

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Erie County, for further proceedings, in accordance with the following memorandum: The court erred in denying without a hearing defendant's application for visitation with his eight-year-old son. We recently restated the general rule regarding visitation: "`Visitation is always to be premised upon a consideration of the best interests of the children ( Finlay v. Finlay, 240 N.Y. 429, 433-434); however, denying visitation to a natural parent is a drastic remedy and should only be done where there are compelling reasons ( Herb v. Herb, 8 A.D.2d 419), and there must be substantial evidence that such visitation is detrimental to the children's welfare ( Farhi v Farhi, 64 A.D.2d 840; Hotze v. Hotze, 57 A.D.2d 85, mot for lv to app den 42 N.Y.2d 805)' ( Chirumbolo v. Chirumbolo, 75 A.D.2d 992, 993)" ( Parker v. Ford, 89 A.D.2d 806, 806-807). Here, the court did not correlate its decision to deny visitation to defendant with the best interests of the child. Accordingly, the matter is remitted for a hearing to determine whether visitation should be permitted and, if so, whether it should be supervised ( Parker v. Ford, supra).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DE PINTO v. DE PINTO
(Dec 16, 1983)