| Matter of Collins v Bogart |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 07757 [77 AD3d 940] |
| October 26, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Tamika Collins, Respondent, v JeffreyBogart, Appellant. |
—[*1] David M. Rosoff, White Plains, N.Y., for respondent. Helene Migdon Greenberg, Elmsford, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In a custody and visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the fatherappeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Klein, J.), entered August 4,2009, which, after a hearing, granted the mother's petition for permission to relocate with theparties' child to North Carolina.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court's determination that the mother'sproposed relocation to North Carolina is in the best interests of the subject child is supported by asound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Tropea v Tropea, 87 NY2d 727,739-742 [1996]; Aziz v Aziz, 8AD3d 596, 597 [2004]). The mother demonstrated that she will have a larger network ofsupport in North Carolina than in New York, and that the move will provide the subject childwith economic, emotional, and educational benefits. We recognize that "[d]espite the multitudeof factors that may properly be considered in the context of a relocation petition, 'the impact ofthe move on the relationship between the child and the noncustodial parent will remain a centralconcern' " (Matter of Martino vRamos, 64 AD3d 657, 657-658 [2009], quoting Matter of Tropea v Tropea, 87NY2d at 739). However, in this particular case, although such concerns are present, they do notoutweigh the other factors involved. Accordingly, the Family Court's determination should not bedisturbed. Dillon, J.P., Florio, Roman and Sgroi, JJ., concur.