Palumbo v. Palumbo
Decision Date | 04 March 2002 |
Citation | 292 A.D.2d 358,738 N.Y.S.2d 90 |
Parties | CHARLEEN PALUMBO, Respondent-Appellant,<BR>v.<BR>ROBERT PALUMBO, Appellant-Respondent. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs.
The order dated August 1, 2000, is not appealable as of right as it does not decide a motion made on notice (see, CPLR 5701 [a]). However, under the circumstances leave to appeal has been granted.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court's award of custody of the parties' daughter to the plaintiff, has a sound and substantial basis in the record (see, Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167; Barbato v Barbato, 264 AD2d 792). The Supreme Court's custody determination is supported by evidence that the plaintiff would offer the daughter the best opportunity to separate, individuate, and to grow into her own person, without interfering in a positive relationship with the defendant, even though both parties were responsible and loving parents (see, Barbato v Barbato, supra at 793).
The Supreme Court also properly gave little weight to the defendant's experts who testified that he should be awarded custody of the child. The conclusions reached by the experts hired by the defendant were based upon inadequate information, and a biased one-sided description of events provided by the defendant (see, Alan G. v Joan G., 104 AD2d 147, 154; Matter of Gloria S. v Richard B., 80 AD2d 72, 76-77).
Equally without merit is the defendant's claim that the Supreme Court erred in failing to consider joint custody. An award of joint custody in this case would not be in the child's best interests, particularly in light of the acrimonious relationship between the parties, and their inability to communicate with each other and agree upon the care of the child (see, Bliss v Ach, 56 NY2d 995; Braiman v Braiman, 44 NY2d 584; Forzano v Scuderi, 224 AD2d 385).
The Supreme Court erred in its award of visitation to the defendant. While the court correctly rejected the defendant's request for joint custody, the award of visitation to the defendant, which provided that the daughter would reside with him on alternate weeks during the school year and for one half of the summer vacation, is inconsistent with the award of sole custody to the mother. As the parties are unable to deal...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
East v. Usher E.
...conveyed to them and they never spoke with the father. Their testimony, therefore, is given less weight ( see Palumbo v. Palumbo, 292 A.D.2d 358, 738 N.Y.S.2d 90 [2 Dept., 2002] [“The Supreme Court properly gave little weight to the defendant's expert where expert's conclusions were based o......
-
Bongocan v. Javier L.
...parent to meaningful time together (see Chamberlain v. Chamberlain, 24 A.D.3d 589, 592–593, 808 N.Y.S.2d 352 ; Palumbo v. Palumbo, 292 A.D.2d 358, 360, 738 N.Y.S.2d 90 ; Cesario v. Cesario, 168 A.D.2d 911, 565 N.Y.S.2d 653 ). Here, in crafting an access schedule for the father, the court no......
- NDUE v. Resnick