Matter of Anwar v Sani
2010 NY Slip Op 08100 [78 AD3d 827]
November 9, 2010
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, January 19, 2011


In the Matter of Khurshid Anwar, Respondent,
v
HadizaSani, Appellant.

[*1]Placidus Aguwa, Jamaica, N.Y., for appellant. Helene Bernstein, Brooklyn, N.Y., forrespondent. John C. Macklin, New Hyde Park, N.Y., attorney for the child.

In a custody and visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the motherappeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Ebrahimoff, Ct. Atty. Ref.), datedMarch 16, 2010, which, after a hearing, granted the father's cross petition to modify the custodyand visitation provisions of the parties' judgment of divorce dated September 29, 2006, so as toaward him sole custody and only awarded her supervised visitation.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

"In order to modify an existing custody arrangement, there must be a showing of asubsequent change of circumstances so that modification is required to protect the best interestsof the child" (Matter of Fallarino vAyala, 41 AD3d 714, 714 [2007]; see Matter of Hongach v Hongach, 44 AD3d 664 [2007]; Matter of Heuthe v McLaren, 1 AD3d514 [2003]). The best interests of the child are determined by a review of the totality of thecircumstances (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 171 [1982]; Matter ofFallarino v Ayala, 41 AD3d at 714-715). Since the Family Court's custody determination islargely dependent upon an assessment of the credibility of witnesses and upon the character,temperament, and sincerity of the parents, the Family Court's determination should not bedisturbed unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Nunn v Bagley, 63 AD3d1068, 1069 [2009]; Matter ofCarrasquillo v Cora, 60 AD3d 852 [2009]; Matter of Neu v Neu, 303 AD2d 509,510 [2003]).

Here, the Family Court's award of sole custody to the father, which was consistent with theopinion of the court-appointed psychologist and the position of the attorney for the child (see Matter of Bonthu v Bonthu, 67AD3d 906 [2009]), has a sound and substantial basis in the record and will not be disturbed.

The Family Court's determination that the mother's visitation with the child should [*2]be supervised is also supported by a sound and substantial basis inthe record (id. at 907). Mastro, J.P., Balkin, Eng and Hall, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.