| Matter of Bonilla v Amaya |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 00378 [58 AD3d 728] |
| January 20, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Victor Bonilla, Appellant, v Ana Amaya,Respondent. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Ana Amaya, Respondent, v Victor Bonilla,Appellant. (Proceeding No. 2.) |
—[*1] John M. Zenir, Mineola, N.Y., for respondent. Cheryl L. Kreger, Jericho, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In related child custody proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the fatherappeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Nassau County(Phillips, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated August 28, 2006, as, after a hearing, denied his petition for solecustody of the parties' child and granted the mother's petition for sole custody of the subject childand permission to relocate with the child to North Carolina.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
In adjudicating custody and visitation rights, the most important factor for the court toconsider is the best interests of the child (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 174[1982]; Allain v Allain, 35 AD3d [*2]513 [2006]). "Sincethe Family Court's custody determination is largely dependent upon an assessment of thecredibility of the witnesses and upon the character, temperament, and sincerity of the parents, itsdetermination should not be disturbed unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record"(Matter of Plaza v Plaza, 305 AD2d 607, 607 [2003]; see Matter of Brass v Otero, 40 AD3d 752 [2007]). Upon weighingthe appropriate factors here, the Family Court determined that the best interests of the childwould be served by awarding the mother custody. There is a sound and substantial basis in therecord for this determination.
The father's remaining contentions are without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Spolzino, McCarthy andLeventhal, JJ., concur.