| Matter of Chichilnitskiy v Faiman |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 05180 [119 AD3d 681] |
| July 9, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| 1 In the Matter of Michael Chichilnitskiy,Petitioner, v Tatyana Faiman, Respondent. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter ofTatyana Faiman, Respondent, v Michael Chichilnitskiy, Appellant. (Proceeding No.2.) |
Olga Suslova, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.
Janis A. Parazzelli, Floral Park, N.Y., for respondent.
Karen P. Simmons, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Anna Khou and Janet Neustaetter of counsel),attorney for the child.
In related child custody proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, thefather appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Ramirez, J.), datedFebruary 11, 2013, which, after a hearing, denied his petition for joint custody of theparties' child and granted the mother's petition for sole legal and physical custody of theparties' child.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The parties, who were never married to each other, are the parents of a son, bornNovember 29, 2007. The parties lived together at the time the child was born, butapproximately six months later, the parties separated and the mother and child left theshared residence. In January 2010, the father filed a petition for joint custody and themother filed a petition seeking sole custody of the child. After a hearing, the FamilyCourt, inter alia, granted the mother's petition for sole legal and physical custody, anddenied the father's petition for joint custody. The father appeals.
"In making an initial custody determination, the court must consider whatarrangement is in the best interest of the children under the totality of the circumstances"(Matter of Thorpe vHomoet, 116 AD3d 962, 962 [2014]). The essential consideration in making anaward of custody is the best interests of the child (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56NY2d 167, 171 [1982]). Since custody determinations depend to a great extent upon anassessment of the character, credibility, temperament, and sincerity of the parties andwitnesses, deference is accorded to the court's findings and such findings will not bedisturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Harris v Harris, 112 AD3d887 [2013]; Matter ofShannon J. v Aaron P., 111 AD3d 829 [2013]; see also Eschbach vEschbach, 56 NY2d at 174). Joint custody is appropriate between "relatively stable,amicable parents behaving in mature civilized fashion" (Braiman v Braiman, 44NY2d 584, [*2]589-590 [1978]; see Irizarry v Irizarry, 115AD3d 913 [2014]; Matterof Lawrence v Davidson, 109 AD3d 826 [2013]).
Here, contrary to the father's contention, there was a sound and substantial basis inthe record to support the Family Court's determination that it was in the best interest ofthe parties' child to award sole custody to the mother, with the father retaining significantvisitation rights (see Irizarry v Irizarry, 115 AD3d at 914; Matter of Clarke v Wilson, 110AD3d 995, 995 [2013]; Matter of Wallace v Roberts, 105 AD3d 1053, 1053[2013]). Mastro, J.P., Dickerson, Hinds-Radix and Duffy, JJ., concur.