| Matter of Dubuque v Bremiller |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 09724 [79 AD3d 1743] |
| December 30, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| In the Matter of Steven Dubuque, Respondent, v ShawnaM. Bremiller, Appellant. |
—[*1] Alan Birnholz, East Amherst, for petitioner-respondent. Alvin M. Greene, Attorney for the Child, Buffalo, for Rose M.D.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Sharon M. LoVallo, J.), enteredJune 22, 2009 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, inter alia,granted petitioner sole custody of the parties' child.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Respondent mother appeals from an order that, following a hearing, grantedthe petition seeking to modify a prior order of custody and visitation by granting sole custody ofthe parties' daughter to petitioner father and visitation to the mother. Inasmuch as the motherdoes not challenge Family Court's finding that a change in circumstances existed, we need onlyaddress whether it was in the child's best interests to award sole custody to the father (see Matter of Bush v Bush, 74 AD3d1448, 1449 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 711 [2010]).
We note at the outset "that, although the court failed to comply with CPLR 4213 (b) bystating 'the facts it deem[ed] essential' in [awarding sole custody to the father], the record issufficient to permit us to make such findings" (Matter of Chapman v Tucker, 74 AD3d 1905, 1906 [2010]; see Matter of Vezina v Vezina, 8 AD3d1047 [2004]). "Contrary to the mother's contention, the court did not abuse itsdiscretion in awarding the father [sole custody of the child]. Generally, a court's determinationregarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility ofthe witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set asideunless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record . . . We see no basis to disturb thecourt's determination inasmuch as it was based on the court's credibility assessments of thewitnesses and is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record" (Matter of Krug v Krug, 55 AD3d1373, 1374 [2008] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Thayer v Thayer, 67 AD3d 1358 [2009]).
We have considered the mother's remaining contentions and conclude that they are withoutmerit. Present—Martoche, J.P., Smith, Fahey, Peradotto and Green, JJ.