Boggio v. Boggio

96 A.D.3d 834 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012) · Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department · June 13, 2012

Summary

The Appellate Division affirmed an order modifying the father’s visitation rights after finding a change in circumstances and determining that the modified arrangement served the child’s best interests. The court upheld incremental visitation, consideration of the child’s wishes without making visitation solely dependent on her consent, and the requirement that the father participate in counseling.

Holdings

  1. An existing visitation arrangement may be modified only upon a showing of a subsequent change of circumstances and a determination that modification is required; the breakdown in the father's relationship with his daughter and the temporary suspension of visitation satisfied that requirement.
  2. The Family Court properly modified visitation because the incremental schedule was in the child's best interests and had a sound and substantial basis in the record.
  3. The Family Court properly considered the child's wishes but did not base its visitation determination solely on them, and the schedule did not improperly make visitation entirely dependent upon the child's consent.
  4. The Family Court properly directed the father to participate in counseling as a component of the visitation determination.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Family Court properly modified the existing visitation arrangement after a change in circumstances.
  2. Whether the modified visitation schedule served the child's best interests and improperly made visitation dependent upon the child's consent.
  3. Whether the Family Court properly considered the child's wishes without basing its determination solely on those wishes.
  4. Whether the Family Court could direct the father to participate in counseling as a component of the visitation determination.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (15)

  • Matter of Wilson v. McGlinchey, 2 N.Y.3d 375, 380-381 (2004)(followed)
  • Galanti v. Kraus, 85 A.D.3d 723, 724 (2011)(followed)
  • Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 172 (1982)(followed)
  • Friederwitzer v. Friederwitzer, 55 N.Y.2d 89, 96 (1982)(followed)
  • Matter of Crowder v. Austin, 90 A.D.3d 753, 754 (2011)(followed)
  • Matter of Mohabir v. Singh, 78 A.D.3d 1056, 1057 (2010)(followed)
  • Matter of Mera v. Rodriguez, 73 A.D.3d 1069 (2010)(followed)
  • Matter of Jennifer WW., 274 A.D.2d 778, 779 (2000)(followed)
  • Matter of Lozada v. Lozada, 270 A.D.2d 422 (2000)(followed)
  • William-Torand v. Torand, 73 A.D.3d 605, 606 (2010)(distinguished)

Showing top 10 of 15.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…