| Matter of Mohabir v Singh |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 05552 [63 AD3d 1159] |
| June 30, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Koontie Mohabir, Appellant, v KumarSingh, Respondent. |
—[*1] Ann Marie Barbagallo, Fresh Meadows, N.Y., for respondent (no brief filed). Larry S. Bachner, Jamaica, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In a child custody and visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, themother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, QueensCounty (Ebrahimoff, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated May 16, 2008, as, after a hearing, denied her petitionto modify an order of the same court dated October 14, 2003, inter alia, awarding the father solecustody of the parties' child, so as to award her sole custody of the subject child, and modifiedthe visitation schedule in the order dated October 14, 2003, by reducing her visitation with thesubject child.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
By order dated October 14, 2003, the father was awarded sole custody of the parties' childand the mother was awarded liberal visitation. The mother subsequently brought the instantpetition to modify that order so as to award her sole custody. Contrary to the mother'scontentions, the Family Court properly considered the totality of the circumstances indetermining that the best interests of the child would be served by continuing the award of solecustody to the father, and by modifying the prior visitation schedule (see Eschbach vEschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 174 [1982]; Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 NY2d 89, 94[1982]). The Family Court's determination was made after a hearing and an in camera interviewwith the subject child. Since the Family Court's determination has a sound and substantial basisin the record, it will not be disturbed (see Matter of Isseroff v Isseroff, 52 AD3d 834[2008]; Matter of Perez v Martinez, 52 AD3d 518, 519 [2008]; Matter of Tercjak vTercjak, 49 AD3d 772 [2008]; Petek v Petek, 239 AD2d 327, 328 [1997]; seealso Matter of Edwards v Rothschild, 60 AD3d 675, 678 [2009]). Rivera, J.P., Skelos,Balkin and Leventhal, JJ., concur.