Summary
This Appellate Division, Second Department decision reverses a Supreme Court order that denied a mother's motion to modify a post-divorce settlement agreement to relocate with her three children to Connecticut. The court held that the lower court erred in denying the motion without a hearing, as there were material factual disputes regarding the children's best interests. On remand, the court directed the appointment of an attorney to represent the children's interests and ordered a full evidentiary hearing before making a new determination.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred in denying the relocation motion without a hearing.
Holdings
- The order denying the motion to modify the settlement agreement to permit relocation was reversed and the matter remitted for a hearing.
Key quotations
“"The paramount concern in any custody ... determination is the best interests of the child, under the totality of the circumstances" (Matter of Pinto v. Pinto, 177 AD3d 746, 747).” (at 1)
“"Generally, a parent seeking to relocate with a child bears the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the proposed move would be in the child's best interests" (Matter of Conroy v. Vaysman, 191 AD3d 977, 979).” (at 1)
Factual background
Scott and Rachel Stein married in 2010 and divorced in September 2023, leaving three children born in 2012, 2015, and 2018. Their settlement agreement gave joint legal and physical custody and set a parental access schedule. In May 2024 Rachel Stein sought to relocate with the children to Connecticut and to modify the access schedule. The trial court denied the motion without a hearing.
Procedural history
The parties divorced on September 7, 2023. Their settlement agreement was incorporated but not merged into the judgment. In May 2024 the respondent moved to modify the agreement to relocate with the children to Connecticut. The trial court denied the motion without a hearing. The appellant appealed.
Remand instructions
Remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County for appointment of an attorney to represent the children and for a hearing on the motion to modify the settlement agreement to permit relocation.