Islam v. Lee

• Decision Date: 26 March 2014
• Citation: 982 N.Y.S.2d 772,115 A.D.3d 952,2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 02045
• Parties: In the Matter of Shahan ISLAM, respondent, v. Susan L. LEE, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

115 A.D.3d 952
982 N.Y.S.2d 772
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 02045

In the Matter of Shahan ISLAM, respondent,
v.
Susan L. LEE, appellant.

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

March 26, 2014.

Plaine & Katz, LLP, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (Joshua R. Katz of counsel), for appellant.

Law Offices of Austin I. Idehen, PLLC, Jamaica, N.Y., for respondent.

Osato Eugene Uzamere, Jamaica, N.Y., attorney for the child.

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Stanton, Ct.Atty.Ref.), dated May 10, 2013, which, upon a decision of the same court, also dated May 10, 2013, made after a hearing, granted the father's petition for sole custody of the parties' child with certain visitation to her.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

There is no merit to the mother's contention that the Court Attorney Referee lacked authority to hear and determine the petition, since the record demonstrates that the parties executed a stipulation consenting to such a reference ( see CPLR 4317[a]; Matter of Phelps v. Hunter, 101 A.D.3d 1689, 957 N.Y.S.2d 526;cf. Matter of McClarin v. Valera, 108 A.D.3d 719, 968 N.Y.S.2d 899;Matter of Stewart v. Mosley, 85 A.D.3d 931, 932, 925 N.Y.S.2d 594).

“When determining custody cases, the primary concern is the best interests of the child” ( Salvatore v. Salvatore, 68 A.D.3d 966, 966, 893 N.Y.S.2d 63 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 171, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260;Matter of Edwards v. Rothschild, 60 A.D.3d 675, 676, 875 N.Y.S.2d 155). The factors to be considered in determining the custody arrangement that is in the child's best interests include “the quality of the home environment and the parental guidance the custodial parent provides for the child, the ability of each parent to provide for the child's emotional and intellectual development, the financial status and ability of each parent to provide for the child, the relative fitness of the respective parents, and the effect an award of custody to one parent might have on the child's relationship with the other parent” (Matter of Miguel R. v. Maria N., 104 A.D.3d 771, 772, 960 N.Y.S.2d 489;see Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d at 171–173, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260;Matter of Mullins v. Riener, 100 A.D.3d 760, 761, 953 N.Y.S.2d 664). “As custody determinations turn in large part on assessments of the...