At page 557 Determining grandparent standing for visitation under domestic relations law4 citing casesCourt, Suffolk County (James, R.), dated February 22, 2005, as denied that branch of their motion which was to dismiss the paternal grandmother’s petition…
- Chifrine v. Bekker, 97 A.D.3d 574 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2012).published In considering whether a grandparent is entitled to visitation under Domestic Relations Law § 72 where both parents are alive, the Family Court must determine, first, whether equitable circumstances exist which provide the grandparent with…
- Roberts v. Roberts, 81 A.D.3d 1117 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2011).publishedA hearing to determine the issue of standing is not necessary where there are no triable issues of fact raised in the submitted papers (see CPLR 409 [b]; Karr v Black, 55 AD3d 82, 83 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 712 [2008]; Matter of Marks v…
- Kareem W. v. Fam. Focus Adoption Servs., Inc., 75 A.D.3d 548 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2010).publishedThe appellants were not entitled to a hearing on the visitation issue, as the information before the Family Court enabled it to undertake a comprehensive independent review of that issue (see Matter of Lynda D. v Stacy C., 37 AD3d 1151 [20…
v.
Anthony Cascio
In a proceeding pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 72 for grandparent visitation, the parents appeal, by permission, as limited by their brief, from so müch of an order of the Family[*557] Court, Suffolk County (James, R.), dated February 22, 2005, as denied that branch of their motion which was to dismiss the paternal grandmother’s petition without a hearing.
Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and the branch of the motion which was to dismiss the paternal grandmother’s petition without a hearing is granted.
In considering whether a grandparent is entitled to visitation under Domestic Relations Law § 72 where both parents are alive, the Family Court must determine, first, whether equitable circumstances exist which provide the grandparent with standing and, if such circumstances exist, whether visitation would be in the grandchild’s best interest (see Domestic Relations Law § 72; Matter of Emanuel S. v Joseph E., 78 NY2d 178, 181 [1991]; Matter of Knight v Griffith, 13 AD3d 449 [2004]; Matter of Horowitz v Kelly, 300 AD2d 659 [2002]). Under the particular circumstances of this case, a hearing was not necessary to determine whether the grandmother had the requisite standing. Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Skelos and Lifson, JJ., concur.