witnesses after an evidentiary hearing in New York

2026"Generally, a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Matter of Krug v Krug , 55 AD3d 1373 , 1374 [4th Dept 2008] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Hernandez v McGowan , 246 AD3d 1482 , 1483 [4th Dept 2026]; Matter of Dubuque v Bremiller , 79 AD3d 1743, 1744 [4th Dept 2010]).

2022We reject the mother's further contention that the court erred in granting the father sole custody of the subject child. "[A] court's determination regarding custody . . . issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight" ( Matter of Saunders v Stull , 133 AD3d 1383, 1383 [4th Dept 2015]; see Matter of Dubuque v Bremiller , 79 AD3d 1743 , 1744 [4th Dept 2010]) and "will not be disturbed as long as it is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record" ( Sheridan v Sheridan , 129 AD3d 1567, 1568 [4t

2021It is well settled that "a court's determination regarding custody . . . issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight" ( Matter of Marino v Marino , 90 AD3d 1694 , 1695 [4th Dept 2011] [internal quotation marks omitted]), and such a determination " 'will not be disturbed [where, as here,] it is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record' " ( Matter of Ladd v Krupp , 136 AD3d 1391, 1393 [4th Dept 2016]; see Williams v Williams , 100 AD3d 1347, 1348 [4th [*2]Dept 2012]).

2020Under the circumstances, and considering that "a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Marino , 90 AD3d at 1695 [internal quotation marks omitted]), we perceive no basis upon which to set aside the court's determination.

2026"Generally, a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Matter of Krug v Krug , 55 AD3d 1373 , 1374 [4th Dept 2008] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Hernandez v McGowan , 246 AD3d 1482 , 1483 [4th Dept 2026]; Matter of Dubuque v Bremiller , 79 AD3d 1743, 1744 [4th Dept 2010]).

2022Generally, "a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Matter of Krug v Krug , 55 AD3d 1373 , 1374 [4th Dept 2008] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Crill v Crill , 181 AD3d 1199 , 1200 [4th Dept 2020]).

2019"Generally, a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based on a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside" except where, as here, it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record ( Matter of Stilson v Stilson , 93 AD3d 1222, 1223 [4th Dept 2012] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of McCarthy v Kriegar , 162 AD3d 1563 , 1564 [4th Dept 2018]).

2013The AFC advised the court that her client loved her mother but wanted to return to live with her father in Rochester because the mother was unpredictable, unstable and “scary.” “Generally, a court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record” (Matter of Stilson v Stilson, 93 AD3d 1222, 1223 [2012] [internal quotation marks omitted]).

2020It is well settled that "a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Matter of Marino v Marino , 90 AD3d 1694 , 1695 [4th Dept 2011] [internal quotation marks omitted]). " Such deference is not warranted, however, where the custody determination lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record' " ( Matter of Bryan K.B. v Destiny S.B. , 43 AD3d 1448, 1449 [4th Dept 20

2019It is well settled that "a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Matter of Bryan K.B. v Destiny S.B. [appeal No. 1], 43 AD3d 1448, 1449 [4th Dept 2007] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Graves v Huff [appeal No. 2], 169 AD3d 1476 , 1476 [4th Dept 2019]).

2018It is well settled that "a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Matter of Krug v Krug , 55 AD3d 1373 , 1374 [4th Dept 2008] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Green v Bontzolakes , 83 AD3d 1401, 1402 [4th Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 703 [2011]), i.e., it is not " supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record' " ( Krug , 55 AD3d at 1374

2016It is well settled that “a court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a firsthand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record” (Matter of Dubuque v Bremiller, 79 AD3d 1743, 1744 [2010]; see Matter of Green v Bontzolakes, 83 AD3d 1401, 1402 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 703 [2011]).

2018It is well settled that "a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Matter of Krug v Krug , 55 AD3d 1373 , 1374 [4th Dept 2008] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Green v Bontzolakes , 83 AD3d 1401, 1402 [4th Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 703 [2011]), i.e., it is not " supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record' " ( Krug , 55 AD3d at 1374

2016It is well settled that “a court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a firsthand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record” (Matter of Dubuque v Bremiller, 79 AD3d 1743, 1744 [2010]; see Matter of Green v Bontzolakes, 83 AD3d 1401, 1402 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 703 [2011]).

2010“The denial of visitation ... is a drastic remedy to be employed only where there are compelling reasons for doing so and substantial evidence that visitation will be harmful to the child[ren]’s welfare” (Matter of Cameron C., 283 AD2d 946, 947 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 606 [2001]). “ ‘The court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record’ ” (Matter of Hill v Rogers, 213 AD2d 10

2008Generally, a “ ‘court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record’ ” (Matter of Hill v Rogers, 213 AD2d 1079, 1079 [1995]; see Matter of Bryan K.B. v Destiny K.B., 43 AD3d 1448, 1449 [2007]; Matter of Vincent A.B. v Karen T., 30 AD3d 1100, 1101-1102 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 711 [2006]).

2025We reject the mother's further contention that the court erred in granting the father sole legal and primary physical custody. "[A] court ' s determination regarding custody . . . issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight" ( Matter of Saunders v Stull , 133 AD3d 1383, 1383 [4th Dept 2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]), and such a determination "will not be disturbed as long as it is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record" ( Sheridan v Sheridan , 129 AD3d 1567, 1568 [4th Dept 2

2025We reject the mother's further contention that the court erred in granting the father sole legal and primary physical custody. "[A] court ' s determination regarding custody . . . issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight" ( Matter of Saunders v Stull , 133 AD3d 1383, 1383 [4th Dept 2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]), and such a determination "will not be disturbed as long as it is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record" ( Sheridan v Sheridan , 129 AD3d 1567, 1568 [4th Dept 2

2019It is well settled that "a court's determination regarding . . . visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record, i.e., is not supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record" ( Matter of Rulinsky v West , 107 AD3d 1507 , 1509 [4th Dept 2013] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Ordona v Cothern , 126 AD3d 1544, 1545 [4th Dept 2015]; Matter of Dubuque v Bremiller , 79 AD3d 1743, 1744 [4th Dept 2010

2015It is well settled that “a court’s determination regarding . . . visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record, i.e., is not supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Rulinsky v West, 107 AD3d 1507, 1509 [2013] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Dubuque v Bremiller, 79 AD3d 1743, 1744 [2010]).

2025The court's determination here was based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, which is entitled to great weight ( see Matter of Harder v Phetteplace , 93 AD3d 1199, 1200 [4th Dept 2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 808 [2012]), and we conclude that it is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record ( see Matter of Green v Bontzolakes , 111 AD3d 1282, 1284 [4th Dept 2013]).

2013The court’s determination was “ ‘based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, [and] is entitled to great weight,’ ” and we conclude that it is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record (Matter of Harder v Phetteplace, 93 AD3d 1199, 1200 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 808 [2012]).

2020We agree with the father and the AFC that the court's custody determination lacks the requisite sound and substantial basis in the record ( see Matter of Gilman v Gilman , 128 AD3d 1387, 1388 [4th Dept 2015]; see generally Fox v Fox , 177 AD2d 209, 211-212 [4th Dept 1992]).

2019Contrary to the father's contentions, we conclude that Family Court properly considered and weighed the appropriate factors in denying the father's amended petition and in designating the mother as the primary residential parent for all purposes, including the use of her address for school purposes ( see generally Eschbach , 56 NY2d at 172-173 ; Fox v Fox , 177 AD2d 209, 210 [4th Dept 1992]).

2015We see no basis to disturb the court’s determination inasmuch as it was based on the court’s credibility assessments of the witnesses and “is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Angel M.S. v Thomas J.S., 41 AD3d 1227, 1228 [2007]).

2015We see no basis to disturb the court’s determination inasmuch as it was based on the court’s credibility assessments of the witnesses and “is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record” (Matter of Angel M.S. v Thomas J.S., 41 AD3d 1227, 1228 [2007]).

2026"Generally a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based on its first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Matter of Warren v Miller , 132 AD3d 1352, 1354 [4th Dept 2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]).

2021"Generally a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based on its first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Matter of Warren v Miller , 132 AD3d 1352, 1354 [4th Dept 2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]), and here the record establishes that the court's determination resulted from a "careful weighing of [the] appropriate factors . . . , and . . . has a sound and substantial basis in the record" ( Biernbaum , 162 AD3

2017“The court’s ‘first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing ... is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record’ ” (Chyreck, 144 AD3d at 1518).

2017“The court’s ‘first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing ... is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record’ ” (Chyreck, 144 AD3d at 1518).

2015We conclude that there is a sound and substantial basis in the record to support the court’s determination that the mother filed false reports with Child Protective Services regarding the father and repeatedly violated prior court orders regarding visitation, and “[i]t is well settled . . . that [a] concerted effort by one parent to interfere with the other parent’s contact with the child is so inimical to the best interests of the child ... as to, per se, raise a strong probability that [the interfering parent] is unfit” (Matter of Marino v Marino, 90 AD3d 1694, 1695 [2011] [internal quotatio

2015We conclude that there is a sound and substantial basis in the record to support the court’s determination that the mother filed false reports with Child Protective Services regarding the father and repeatedly violated prior court orders regarding visitation, and “[i]t is well settled . . . that [a] concerted effort by one parent to interfere with the other parent’s contact with the child is so inimical to the best interests of the child ... as to, per se, raise a strong probability that [the interfering parent] is unfit” (Matter of Marino v Marino, 90 AD3d 1694, 1695 [2011] [internal quotatio

2013The mother’s violation of the 2009 order and her pattern of continued viola tion of court orders constitute a sufficient change in circumstances, particularly in light of her prolonged and intentional interference with the father’s custodial rights and failure to communicate with him (see Matter of Zwack v Kosier, 61 AD3d 1020, 1021 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 702 [2009]; see also Matter of Owens v Garner, 63 AD3d 1585, 1586 [2009]; Matter of Tyrone W. v Dawn M.P., 27 AD3d 1147, 1148 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 705 [2006]).

2013The mother’s violation of the 2009 order and her pattern of continued viola tion of court orders constitute a sufficient change in circumstances, particularly in light of her prolonged and intentional interference with the father’s custodial rights and failure to communicate with him (see Matter of Zwack v Kosier, 61 AD3d 1020, 1021 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 702 [2009]; see also Matter of Owens v Garner, 63 AD3d 1585, 1586 [2009]; Matter of Tyrone W. v Dawn M.P., 27 AD3d 1147, 1148 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 705 [2006]).

2014“The court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record” (Matter of Samuel L.J. v Sherry H., 206 AD2d 886, 886 [1994], lv denied 84 NY2d 810 [1994]).

2014“The court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record” (Matter of Samuel L.J. v Sherry H., 206 AD2d 886, 886 [1994], lv denied 84 NY2d 810 [1994]).

2019It is well settled that "a court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record" ( Matter of Bryan K.B. v Destiny S.B. , 43 AD3d 1448, 1449 [4th Dept 2007] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Eschbach v Eschbach , 56 NY2d 167, 173-174 [1982]).

2018Initially, we note that the mother does not dispute that the continued deterioration of the parties' relationship and their inability to coparent constitutes a significant change in circumstances warranting an inquiry into whether a change in custody is in the child's best interests ( see Werner v Kenney , 142 AD3d 1351, 1351 [4th Dept 2016]; Matter of Ladd v Krupp , 136 AD3d 1391, 1392 [4th Dept 2016]). "[A] court's determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great we

2025We reject the mother's further contention that the court erred in granting the father sole legal and primary physical custody. "[A] court ' s determination regarding custody . . . issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight" ( Matter of Saunders v Stull , 133 AD3d 1383, 1383 [4th Dept 2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]), and such a determination "will not be disturbed as long as it is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record" ( Sheridan v Sheridan , 129 AD3d 1567, 1568 [4th Dept 2

2025We reject the mother's further contention that the court erred in granting the father sole legal and primary physical custody. "[A] court ' s determination regarding custody . . . issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight" ( Matter of Saunders v Stull , 133 AD3d 1383, 1383 [4th Dept 2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]), and such a determination "will not be disturbed as long as it is supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record" ( Sheridan v Sheridan , 129 AD3d 1567, 1568 [4th Dept 2

2016Here, the record establishes, inter alia, the mother’s obstruction of law enforcement efforts to investigate a sexual assault against one of the children, her attempts to sabotage the father’s relationship with the children, and her placement of her own needs above those of the children (see Matter of Howell v Lovell, 103 AD3d 1229, 1231-1232 [2013]; Matter of Krywanczyk v Krywanczyk, 236 AD2d 746, 747 [1997]).

2016Here, the record establishes, inter alia, the mother’s obstruction of law enforcement efforts to investigate a sexual assault against one of the children, her attempts to sabotage the father’s relationship with the children, and her placement of her own needs above those of the children (see Matter of Howell v Lovell, 103 AD3d 1229, 1231-1232 [2013]; Matter of Krywanczyk v Krywanczyk, 236 AD2d 746, 747 [1997]).

2016Here, the record establishes, inter alia, the mother’s obstruction of law enforcement efforts to investigate a sexual assault against one of the children, her attempts to sabotage the father’s relationship with the children, and her placement of her own needs above those of the children (see Matter of Howell v Lovell, 103 AD3d 1229, 1231-1232 [2013]; Matter of Krywanczyk v Krywanczyk, 236 AD2d 746, 747 [1997]).

2016Here, the record establishes, inter alia, the mother’s obstruction of law enforcement efforts to investigate a sexual assault against one of the children, her attempts to sabotage the father’s relationship with the children, and her placement of her own needs above those of the children (see Matter of Howell v Lovell, 103 AD3d 1229, 1231-1232 [2013]; Matter of Krywanczyk v Krywanczyk, 236 AD2d 746, 747 [1997]).

2015The record further establishes that respondents are in excellent physical health and are better able to handle the stress involved in raising a child than is the grandmother. “[A] court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight” (id. at 1695 [internal quotation marks omitted]), and we perceive no basis upon which to disturb the court’s order. -3- 1357 CAF 12-00745 Finally, we note that, although it appears that several new factual developments have ari

2015Finally, we note that, although it appears that several new factual developments have arisen since the entry of the order on appeal, there is no reason for us to remit the matter to Family Court for a new best interests hearing, in light of the ongoing proceedings in Family Court (cf. Matter of Kennedy v Kennedy, 107 AD3d 1625, 1626 [2013]).

2013The mother’s violation of the 2009 order and her pattern of continued viola tion of court orders constitute a sufficient change in circumstances, particularly in light of her prolonged and intentional interference with the father’s custodial rights and failure to communicate with him (see Matter of Zwack v Kosier, 61 AD3d 1020, 1021 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 702 [2009]; see also Matter of Owens v Garner, 63 AD3d 1585, 1586 [2009]; Matter of Tyrone W. v Dawn M.P., 27 AD3d 1147, 1148 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 705 [2006]).

2013The mother’s violation of the 2009 order and her pattern of continued viola tion of court orders constitute a sufficient change in circumstances, particularly in light of her prolonged and intentional interference with the father’s custodial rights and failure to communicate with him (see Matter of Zwack v Kosier, 61 AD3d 1020, 1021 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 702 [2009]; see also Matter of Owens v Garner, 63 AD3d 1585, 1586 [2009]; Matter of Tyrone W. v Dawn M.P., 27 AD3d 1147, 1148 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 705 [2006]).

2013Finally, the mother is not aggrieved by the court’s implicit denial of two violation petitions filed by the father and thus may not raise contentions on appeal with respect thereto (see Johnson v Johnson, 68 AD3d 1685, 1686 [2009]; see generally CPLR 5511; K.J.D.E.

2013Finally, the mother is not aggrieved by the court’s implicit denial of two violation petitions filed by the father and thus may not raise contentions on appeal with respect thereto (see Johnson v Johnson, 68 AD3d 1685, 1686 [2009]; see generally CPLR 5511; K.J.D.E.

2013While the fact that the father “ ‘is incarcerated will not, by itself, render visitation [with him] inappropriate’ ” (Matter of Thomas v Thomas, 277 AD2d 935, 935 [2000]), that fact, when considered in conjunction with the evidence establishing the father’s lack of prior contact with the child, the father’s failure to interact with the child during visitation and the child’s express desire not to visit with the father, provides a sufficient basis for the court’s determination that terminating visitation with the father was in the child’s best interests (see Matter of Bougor v Murray, 283 AD2d

2013While the fact that the father “ ‘is incarcerated will not, by itself, render visitation [with him] inappropriate’ ” (Matter of Thomas v Thomas, 277 AD2d 935, 935 [2000]), that fact, when considered in conjunction with the evidence establishing the father’s lack of prior contact with the child, the father’s failure to interact with the child during visitation and the child’s express desire not to visit with the father, provides a sufficient basis for the court’s determination that terminating visitation with the father was in the child’s best interests (see Matter of Bougor v Murray, 283 AD2d

2010“The denial of visitation ... is a drastic remedy to be employed only where there are compelling reasons for doing so and substantial evidence that visitation will be harmful to the child[ren]’s welfare” (Matter of Cameron C., 283 AD2d 946, 947 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 606 [2001]). “ ‘The court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record’ ” (Matter of Hill v Rogers, 213 AD2d 10

2000Memorandum — “The court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record (see, Paul G. v Donna G., 175 AD2d 236, 237 ; D'Errico v D'Errico, 158 AD2d 503, 504 ; Lenczycki v Lenczycki, 152 AD2d 621, 623 )” (Matter of Samuel L.

2010“The denial of visitation ... is a drastic remedy to be employed only where there are compelling reasons for doing so and substantial evidence that visitation will be harmful to the child[ren]’s welfare” (Matter of Cameron C., 283 AD2d 946, 947 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 606 [2001]). “ ‘The court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record’ ” (Matter of Hill v Rogers, 213 AD2d 10

2000Memorandum — “The court’s determination regarding custody and visitation issues, based upon a first-hand assessment of the credibility of the witnesses after an evidentiary hearing, is entitled to great weight and will not be set aside unless it lacks an evidentiary basis in the record (see, Paul G. v Donna G., 175 AD2d 236, 237 ; D'Errico v D'Errico, 158 AD2d 503, 504 ; Lenczycki v Lenczycki, 152 AD2d 621, 623 )” (Matter of Samuel L.