Quintanilla v. Morales, 110 A.D.3d 1081 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). · Go Syfert
Search
Quintanilla v. Morales, 110 A.D.3d 1081 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
26 citation events (26 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Yuan Gao v. City of New York (nyappdiv, 2016-12-21)
Treatment trajectory · 2014 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2014 2020 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Yuan Gao v. City of New York
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
The unsworn report of the plaintiffs’ expert submitted in opposition to the motion was not in admissible form (see CPLR 2106; Hoffman v Mucci, 124 AD3d 723, 724 [2015]; Mazzola v City of New York, 32 AD3d 906, 907 [2006]), and the expert’s affidavit submitted on surreply, swearing to the truth of the unsworn statements in his report, should not have been entertained in determining the motion (see McMullin v Walker, 68 AD3d 943, 944 [2009]; Flores v Stankiewicz, 35 AD3d 804, 805 [2006]). *941 As the plaintiffs have not appealed, their contention that the Supreme Court should have denied tha…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Sachs v. Asotskaya
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
These violations amounted to a change in circumstances such that modification of the prior order was required to ensure the child’s best interests (see Matter of Preciado v Ireland, 125 AD3d at 662 ; Matter of Quintanilla v Morales, 110 AD3d 1081, 1082 [2013]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Town of Hempstead v. AJM Capital II, LLC
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Accordingly, its contention that such relief should have been granted is not properly before this Court (see Matter of Margary v Martinez, 118 AD3d 1004, 1006 [2014]; Matter of Quintanilla v Morales, 110 AD3d 1081, 1082 [2013]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Adragna v. Fuori
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Since a custody determination necessarily depends to a great extent upon assessments of the credibility, character, temperament, and sincerity of the parties, the trial court’s determination should not be disturbed unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Quintanilla v Morales, 110 AD3d 1081, 1081-1082 [2013]; Matter of Davis v Pignataro, 97 AD3d 677, 677-678 [2012]; Cervera v Bressler, 90 AD3d 803, 805 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Margary v. Martinez
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
Since the respondent did not appeal or cross-appeal, his remaining contentions, made in connection with his request for certain affirmative relief, are not properly before this Court (see Hecht v City of New York, 60 NY2d 57, 61 [1983]; Matter of Quintanilla v Morales, 110 AD3d 1081, 1082 [2013]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Margary v. Martinez
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
Since the respondent did not appeal or cross-appeal, his remaining contentions, made in connection with his request for certain affirmative relief, are not properly before this Court (see Hecht v City of New York, 60 NY2d 57, 61 [1983]; Matter of Quintanilla v Morales, 110 AD3d 1081, 1082 [2013]).
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Preciado v. Ireland
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
“Since weighing the factors relevant to any custody [or visitation] determination requires an evaluation of the credibility and sincerity of the parties involved, the hearing court’s findings are accorded deference, and will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Jackson v Coleman, 94 AD3d 762, 763 [2012]; see Matter of Quintanilla v Morales, 110 AD3d at 1081-1082 ).
discussed Cited "see" Begy v. Begy
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
“Since any custody determination depends to a very great extent upon the hearing court’s assessment of the credibility of the witnesses and of the character, temperament, and sincerity of the parties, its findings are generally accorded great respect and will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Davis v Pignataro, 97 AD3d 677, 677-678 [2012] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Quintanilla v Morales, 110 AD3d at 1081-1082).
discussed Cited "see" Begy v. Begy
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
“Since any custody determination depends to a very great extent upon the hearing court’s assessment of the credibility of the witnesses and of the character, temperament, and sincerity of the parties, its findings are generally accorded great respect and will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Davis v Pignataro, 97 AD3d 677, 677-678 [2012] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Quintanilla v Morales, 110 AD3d at 1081-1082).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Wilfredo Quintanilla
v.
Sandra Morales
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Oct 30, 2013.
110 A.D.3d 1081
Cited by 14 opinions  |  Published

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Eisman, J.), dated March 28, 2012, which, after a hearing, in effect, granted the father’s petition to modify a prior order of custody of the same court dated June 9, 2006, entered upon the consent of the parties, so as to award him sole legal and physical custody of the subject child.

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

“Modification of an existing custody arrangement is permissible only upon a showing that there has been a change in circumstances such that a modification is necessary to ensure the continued best interests and welfare of the child” (Matter of Tori v Tori, 103 AD 3d 654, 655 [2013]; see Matter of Ross v Ross, 96 AD3d 856, 857 [2012]; Matter of Pignataro v Davis, 8 AD3d 487, 488 [2004]). The best interests of the child must be determined by a review of the totality of the circumstances (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 171-172 [1982]; Matter of O’Loughlin v Sweetland, 98 AD3d 983, 984 [2012]). “Since[*1082] weighing the factors relevant to any custody determination requires an evaluation of the credibility and sincerity of the parties involved, the h earing court’s findings are accorded deference, and will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Jackson v Coleman, 94 AD3d 762, 763 [2012]; see Matter of Buxenbaum v Fulmer, 82 AD3d 1223, 1224 [2011]).

Here, contrary to the mother’s contention, the Family Court properly considered the totality of the circumstances, and its determination that there had been a sufficient change in circumstances requiring a change in custody to protect the best interests of the subject child is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record. Accordingly, the Family Court’s determination will not be disturbed (see Matter of Flores v Mark, 107 AD3d 796, 797 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 865 [2013]; Matter of Lawlor v Eder, 106 AD3d 739, 740 [2013]; Matter of Pap-pas v Kells, 77 AD3d 952, 953-954 [2010]).

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Since the father did not appeal, his contention that the Family Court’s award of visitation to the mother should be modified is not properly before this Court (see Matter of Wiebke v Wiebke, 77 AD3d 964, 965 [2010]). Skelos, J.p., Dickerson, Hall and Miller, JJ., concur.