| Matter of Roldan v Nieves |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 06423 [76 AD3d 634] |
| August 17, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Angelo Roldan, Respondent, v MaribelNieves, Appellant. |
—[*1] Lisa Siano, Bellmore, N.Y., for respondent. Cheryl L. Kreger-Grella, Jericho, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appealsfrom an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Singer, J.), dated April 6, 2009, which, aftera hearing, granted the father's petition for sole custody of the child and awarded her onlysupervised visitation.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The court's paramount concern in any custody dispute is whether, under the totality of thecircumstances, a determination of custody is in the best interests of the child (see Eschbach vEschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 171 [1982]; Matter of Nikolic v Ingrassia, 47 AD3d 819 [2008]). Custodydeterminations turn in large part on assessments of the credibility, character, temperament, andsincerity of the parties, and where a full evidentiary hearing has been held on the child's bestinterests, the resultant findings will not be lightly set aside on appeal (see Petek v Petek,239 AD2d 327 [1997]). The Family Court's findings should be accorded deference and itsdetermination should not be disturbed unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record(see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d at 173-174; Salvatore v Salvatore, 68 AD3d 966 [2009]; Matter of Berkham v Vessia, 63 AD3d1155 [2009]).
Here, contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court's finding that the child's bestinterests would be served by an award of sole custody to the father, with supervised visitation tothe mother, has a sound and substantial basis in the record. Skelos, J.P., Hall, Roman and Sgroi,JJ., concur.