| Matter of Krug v Krug |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 07426 [55 AD3d 1373] |
| October 3, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| In the Matter of Tina M. Krug, Appellant, v Joseph F. Krug,Respondent. |
—[*1] Finocchio & English, Esqs., Syracuse, D.J. & J.A. Cirando, Esqs. (Elizabeth DeV. Moeller ofcounsel), for respondent-respondent. Michelle A. Ellsworth, Law Guardian, Syracuse, for Joshua F.K. and Gianna M.K.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Onondaga County (Robert J. Rossi, J.), entered March13, 2007 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, among other things,granted the parties joint custody of their two children, with primary residence with petitioner andunsupervised visitation to respondent.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Petitioner mother appeals from an order granting the parties joint custody of theirtwo children, with primary physical residence with the mother and unsupervised visitation to respondentfather. Family Court determined, following a lengthy hearing, that both parents were fit and responsible.Contrary to the mother's contention, the court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the fatherunsupervised visitation with the children. Generally, a " 'court's determination regarding custody andvisitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after anevidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiarybasis in the record' " (Matter of Hill v Rogers, 213 AD2d 1079, 1079 [1995]; see Matter of Bryan K.B. v Destiny S.B.,43 AD3d 1448, 1449 [2007]; Matter of Vincent A.B. v Karen T., 30 AD3d 1100, 1101-1102 [2006],lv denied 7 NY3d 711 [2006]). We see no basis to disturb the court's determination inasmuchas it was based on the court's credibility assessments of the witnesses and "is supported by a sound andsubstantial basis in the record" (Matter ofAngel M.S. v Thomas J.S., 41 AD3d 1227, 1228 [2007]).
The remaining contention of the mother concerns a final order in a related proceeding from whichshe failed to take an appeal and thus is not properly before us (see Vigliotti v State of New [*2]York, 24AD3d 1217 [2005]; see generally CPLR 5501, 5513, 5515; Hecht v City of NewYork, 60 NY2d 57, 61 [1983]). Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Smith, Centra, Green and Pine,JJ.