| Craig v Williams-Craig |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 02966 [61 AD3d 712] |
| April 14, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Philip Craig, Respondent, v Veronica Williams-Craig,Appellant. |
—[*1] Joan L. Beranbaum, New York, N.Y. (Shirley Thebaud of counsel), for respondent. Zenith T. Taylor, Forest Hills, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief,from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Strauss J.), entered February27, 2008, as, after a nonjury trial, awarded the father sole custody of the parties' child, withvisitation to her.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs ordisbursements.
The essential consideration in making an award of custody is the best interests of the child(see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 171 [1982]). "Factors to be considered indetermining those bests interests include the parental guidance provided by the custodial parent,each parent's ability to provide for the child's emotional and intellectual development, eachparent's ability to provide for the child financially, the relative fitness of each parent, and theeffect an award of custody to one parent might have on the child's relationship with the otherparent" (Matter of Berrouet v Greaves,35 AD3d 460, 461 [2006]). Since the Supreme Court's determination is largelydependent upon an assessment of the credibility of witnesses and upon the character,temperament, and sincerity of the parents (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d at 173;Bibas v Bibas, 58 AD3d 586[2009]), its custody determination should not be set aside unless it lacks a sound and substantialbasis in the record (see [*2]Matter of Walton v Walton,306 AD2d 491, 491-492 [2003]; Miller v Pipia, 297 AD2d 362, 364 [2002]).
Here, the Supreme Court's determination is supported by a sound and substantial basis in therecord, including the recommendation of the court-appointed psychiatrist (see Matter ofBerrouet v Greaves, 35 AD3d at 460-462).
The mother's remaining contentions are without merit. Fisher, J.P., Miller, Angiolillo andBalkin, JJ., concur.