Herrera v. Vallejo

• Decision Date: 05 June 2013
• Citation: 107 A.D.3d 714,2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 04003,966 N.Y.S.2d 206
• Parties: In the Matter of Judith HERRERA, respondent, v. Chris VALLEJO, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

107 A.D.3d 714

966 N.Y.S.2d 206

2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 04003

In the Matter of Judith HERRERA, respondent,

v.Chris VALLEJO, appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

June 5, 2013.

Susan A. DeNatale, Bayport, N.Y., for appellant.

Glenn Gucciardo, Northport, N.Y., for respondent.

Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (John B. Belmonte of counsel), attorney for the child.

DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO, J.P., L. PRISCILLA HALL, SHERI S. ROMAN, and SYLVIA HINDS–RADIX, JJ.

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Loguercio, J.), dated February 28, 2012, as granted the petition of the nonparent for sole custody of the subject child.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

In a child custody dispute between a parent and a nonparent, the parent has a superior right to custody that cannot be denied unless the nonparent establishes that the parent has relinquished that right due to surrender, abandonment, persistent neglect, unfitness, or other extraordinary circumstances ( see Matter of Bennett v. Jeffreys, 40 N.Y.2d 543, 548, 387 N.Y.S.2d 821, 356 N.E.2d 277;Matter of North v. Yeagley, 96 A.D.3d 949, 950, 946 N.Y.S.2d 508;Matter of Flores v. Flores, 91 A.D.3d 869, 870, 936 N.Y.S.2d 676;Matter of Ruiz v. Travis, 84 A.D.3d 1242, 924 N.Y.S.2d 456;Matter of Souza v. Bennett, 81 A.D.3d 836, 916 N.Y.S.2d 823;Matter of LaBorde v. Pennington, 60 A.D.3d 950, 951, 876 N.Y.S.2d 87;Matter of Silverman v. Wagschal, 35 A.D.3d 747, 748, 827 N.Y.S.2d 229;Matter of Dellolio v. Tracy, 35 A.D.3d 737, 737–738, 825 N.Y.S.2d 783;Matter of Campo v. Chapman, 24 A.D.3d 439, 805 N.Y.S.2d 121). Only if the nonparent meets this burden does the court determine whether the best interests of the child warrant awarding custody to the nonparent ( see Matter of Bennett v. Jeffreys, 40 N.Y.2d at 548, 387 N.Y.S.2d 821, 356 N.E.2d 277;Matter of Revis v. Marzan, 100 A.D.3d 1004, 954 N.Y.S.2d 217;Matter of North v. Yeagley, 96 A.D.3d at 950, 946 N.Y.S.2d 508;Matter of Jumper v. Hemphill, 75 A.D.3d 507, 904 N.Y.S.2d 501;Matter of Wilson v. Smith, 24 A.D.3d 562, 808 N.Y.S.2d 263;Matter of Campo v. Chapman, 24 A.D.3d at 440, 805 N.Y.S.2d 121).

Contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court properly determined that the nonparent petitioner sustained her burden of demonstrating the existence of extraordinary circumstances. The evidence before the Family Court, which included prior neglect findings against the mother arising from her abuse of alcohol, and testimony regarding the highly unstable and unsafe living situation the mother created for the child through her abuse of alcohol and her acts of domestic violence towards the child, demonstrated the existence of extraordinary circumstances ( see Matter of Rodriguez v. Delacruz–Swan, 100 A.D.3d 1286, 954...