K.A. v. N.Q. (In re a Proceeding Under Article 6 of Family Court Act), 2022-50187

CourtNew York Family Court
Writing for the CourtCONRAD D. SINGER, J.
PartiesIn the Matter of a Proceeding Under Article 6 of the Family Court Act, v. N.Q., Respondent. K.A., Petitioner,
Decision Date02 February 2022
Docket Number2022-50187

In the Matter of a Proceeding Under Article 6 of the Family Court Act,

K.A., Petitioner,
v.

N.Q., Respondent.

No. 2022-50187

Family Court, Nassau County

February 2, 2022


Unpublished Opinion

Crystal Pannell, Esq., Attorney for Petitioner, K.A.

Harry Burstein, Esq., Attorney for Respondent, N.Q.

Megan Wooley, Esq., Attorney for Child.

CONRAD D. SINGER, J.

The following papers were read on this Motion:

Petitioner's Order to Show Cause and Supporting Affirmation with Exhibits 1

Respondent's Opposition to Petitioner's Emergency Order to Show Cause and Exhibits 2

The petitioner father, K.A. ("petitioner" or "father") in this Article 6 proceeding has moved by Order to Show Cause, filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Nassau, on December 9, 2021, for an Order which: 1) awards the father temporary sole legal and sole residential custody of the parties' children, C.A. [DOB 0/00/0000] and L.A. [DOB 0/0/0000]; 2) directs the respondent mother, N.Q. ["respondent" or "mother"], to enroll in parenting classes; and 3) directs the respondent to enroll in anger management classes; and 4) upon completion of a court-ordered program, award the parties joint residential and joint legal custody of the parties' two minor children; and 5) awards the father an Order of Protection against the mother. The mother filed papers opposing the father's motion by Order to Show Cause. The father's motion is determined as set forth below:

The parties have never been married. On or about December 6, 2021, the father filed a petition in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Nassau, for temporary custody of the parties' children pursuant to Article 6 of the Family Court Act and a Temporary Stay Away Order of Protection, pursuant to Article 8 of the Family Court Act, against the mother and in favor of the petitioner and the parties' children. The father affirmed in his Petition that he is not seeking a permanent change in custody; he is asking to be awarded temporary custody until after the mother enrolls in programs to help her deal with her anger and violent tendencies, following which he would "welcome a return" to the parties' prior 50/50 custody arrangement.

He subsequently moved, by Emergency Order to Show Cause, for an Order which: 1) Awards him temporary sole legal and sole residential custody of the parties' children; 2) Directs the mother to enroll in parenting classes; 3) Directs the mother to enroll in anger management classes; 4) Upon completion of a court-ordered program, awards the parties joint residential and legal custody of the parties' children; and 5) Awards the father an Order of Protection against the mother.

The Order to Show Cause was signed by Hon. Gary F. Knobel, JSC, was made returnable December 14, 2021, and granted the petitioner the following interim relief: 1) awarded the father temporary legal and residential custody of the parties' children, pending the hearing of his motion; 2) ordered that the children shall not be removed or relocated outside of the County of Nassau, pending the hearing on the father's motion; 3) ordered that the father and the parties' children were awarded a Temporary Order of Protection ["TOP"], requiring the mother to, inter alia, comply with the following:

"Stay away and refrain from: [i] Assaulting, stalking harassment, aggravated harassment, menacing, reckless endangerment, strangulation, criminal obstruction of breathing or circulation, disorderly conduct, criminal mischief, sexual abuse, sexual misconduct, forcible touching intimidation, threats, identity theft, grand larceny coercion or any criminal offense against" the father and both of the parties' children. (Emergency Order to Show Cause, dated December 9, 2021).

The father's motion includes the supporting affirmation of his counsel, in which counsel asserts that emergency relief is needed because the mother is "engaging in erratic and volatile behavior that negatively impacts the children" and "demonstrates poor judgment" pertaining to the parties' children, including her intention to relocate, in the middle of the school year, without informing the father of their new address. (Affirmation of Crystal S. Pannell, Esq., dated December 3, 2020 ["Pannell Aff. in Support"], ¶ 4).

The mother's opposition to the father's motion consists...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT