Kerr v. Kerr

• Decision Date: 02 October 2020
• Docket Number: CAF 19-01509,807
• Citation: 187 A.D.3d 1593,131 N.Y.S.3d 762
• Parties: In the Matter of Aimee KERR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dennis KERR, Respondent-Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

187 A.D.3d 1593

131 N.Y.S.3d 762

In the Matter of Aimee KERR, Petitioner-Appellant,

v.Dennis KERR, Respondent-Respondent.

807

CAF 19-01509

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

Entered: October 2, 2020

ERICKSON WEBB SCOLTON & HAJDU, LAKEWOOD (LYLE T. HAJDU OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL A BENSON, SPRINGVILLE, FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

EMILY A. VELLA, SPRINGVILLE, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN.

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND WINSLOW, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, petitioner mother appeals from an order that, inter alia, determined that the live-in girlfriend of respondent father shall not be required to be supervised when interacting with the subject children. Contrary to the contention of the mother, we conclude that the determination of Family Court is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record and should not be disturbed (see Matter of Common v. Pirro , 184 A.D.3d 1087, 1088, 123 N.Y.S.3d 871 [4th Dept. 2020] ; Sheridan v. Sheridan , 129 A.D.3d 1567, 1568, 12 N.Y.S.3d 434 [4th Dept. 2015] ). Although the father's girlfriend acknowledged that she had a lengthy criminal history and past substance abuse issues that led to her losing custody of her own children, the court credited the girlfriend's testimony that she had been drug free for seven years, was employed, and had been a law-abiding citizen since her most recent conviction in 2012. The court also credited the testimony of the girlfriend's sister and mother, who had no concerns about the girlfriend interacting with children. We see no basis to disturb the court's credibility determination, which is entitled to great deference (see Matter of Garland v. Goodwin , 13 A.D.3d 1059, 1059-1060, 786 N.Y.S.2d 770 [4th Dept. 2004] ).