| Matter of Manzella v Milano |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 02678 [82 AD3d 1242] |
| March 29, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Francesco Manzella, Respondent, v DawnMilano, Appellant. |
—[*1] Francesco Manzella, Rocky Point, N.Y., respondent pro se. Arza Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y. (Steven A. Feldman of counsel), Attorney for theChildren.
In a visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from anorder of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Budd, J.), dated January 8, 2010, which, after ahearing, granted the father's motion to modify the visitation provision contained in an order ofthe same court dated March 10, 2008, and directed that the mother's visitation with the parties'children be supervised.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
"In order to modify an existing custody or visitation arrangement, there must be a showingthat there has been a change in circumstances such that modification is required to protect thebest interests of the child" (Matter of Arduino v Ayuso, 70 AD3d 682, 682 [2010];see Matter of Quinones v Ibarrondo, 67 AD3d 686, 686 [2009]). "The court'sdetermination [with respect to custody and visitation] depends to a great extent upon itsassessment of the credibility of the witnesses and upon the character, temperament, and sincerityof the parents" (Matter of Blanco v Corbett, 8 AD3d 374, 374 [2004]). As such, thecredibility findings of the hearing court are entitled to great weight and should not be disturbedunless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Sinnott-Turner vKolba, 60 AD3d 774, 775 [2009]; Cashel v Cashel, 46 AD3d 501 [2007]). Here,contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court's determination had a sound and substantialbasis in the record.
The mother's remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Eng and Lott,JJ., concur.