| Matter of James D. v Tammy W. |
| 2007 NY Slip Op 08587 [45 AD3d 1358] |
| November 9, 2007 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| In the Matter of James D., Appellant, v Tammy W.,Respondent. |
—[*1] M. Kathleen Curran, Law Guardian, Canandaigua, for Jessy D.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Ontario County (Frederic T. Henry, Jr., J.H.O.),entered March 3, 2006 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, amongother things, denied the petition.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimouslyaffirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Contrary to the contention of respondent father, Family Court did not err indenying his petition seeking a change in custody inasmuch as he failed to establish a " 'change incircumstances which reflects a real need for change to ensure the best interest[s] of the child' "(Matter of Amy L.M. v Kevin M.M., 31 AD3d 1224, 1225 [2006], quoting Matter ofIrwin v Neyland, 213 AD2d 773, 773 [1995]). Here, the father established that respondentmother no longer relied on him for child care assistance in excess of the visitation set forth in theparties' custody and visitation agreement because she moved and changed school districts. He didnot allege that the mother is an unfit parent, nor did he establish that the existing custodial andvisitation arrangement is contrary to the child's best interests. We thus conclude that the court'sdetermination has a sound and substantial basis in the record and should not be disturbed (seeMatter of Green v Mitchell, 266 AD2d 884 [1999]). Present—Gorski, J.P., Smith,Centra, Lunn and Peradotto, JJ.