In 2023, the parents of a 13-year-old child filed competing custody petitions. The mother also filed a family offense petition against the father. After an initial court appearance on August 30, 2023, because the father failed to appear at the next scheduled appearance on September 27, 2023, the court awarded sole custody to the mother, with supervised parental access to the father, and also issued an order of protection; all without a hearing.
When the father later moved to vacate those orders, the Westchester County Family Court denied that request. But on appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, ended up modifying that determination.
Since custody determinations should be based on the child's best interests, after holding a “comprehensive hearing” which considers all relevant factors, and because no such hearing was conducted in this case, the AD2 thought the father’s motion to vacate the custody order should have been granted.
As a result, the matter was remitted to the Family Court for a hearing and a new determination of the parties’ custody petitions. However, the AD2 left the order of protection in place, as the father failed to provide a reasonable excuse for his default – and pending the new hearing and determination, the provisions of the original custody and parental access order remained in effect.
The AD2 sure took custody of that ….
# # #
DECISION
MATTER OF GR v. FA