| Matter of Luke v Luke |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 02954 [72 AD3d 689] |
| April 6, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Carol Luke, Appellant, v Gustavo Luke,Respondent. |
—[*1] Gustavo Luke, New York, N.Y., respondent pro se.
In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the petitioner appealsfrom an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Sheares, J.), dated July 8, 2009, which, after ahearing, dismissed the petition.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to beresolved by the Family Court, and that court's determination regarding the credibility ofwitnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal, and will not be disturbed if supported by therecord (see Matter of Holder vFrancis, 67 AD3d 679 [2009]; Matter of Sblendorio v D'Agostino, 60 AD3d 773 [2009]; Matter of Fernandez v Pacheco, 59AD3d 542, 543 [2009]; Matter ofGray v Gray, 55 AD3d 909 [2008]; Matter of Barnes v Barnes, 54 AD3d 755 [2008]; Matter of Wilkins v Wilkins, 47 AD3d823, 824 [2008]). Here, the Family Court was presented with sharply conflicting testimonyas to whether the respondent assaulted or attempted to assault the petitioner during the course ofthe subject incident. The Family Court's determination that the petitioner had failed to establishthat a family offense was committed was based solely upon its assessment of the credibility ofthe parties and of an eyewitness, and is supported by the record (see Matter of Barnes vBarnes, 54 AD3d at 756; Matter of Wilkins v Wilkins, 47 AD3d at 824; Matter of Hall v Hall, 45 AD3d842, 843 [2007]). Accordingly, we decline to disturb the Family Court's determination.Mastro, J.P., Skelos, Eng and Roman, JJ., concur.