best-interest analysis in New York

2024"While the express wishes of children are not controlling, for purposes of a best-interest analysis in a custody modification proceeding, they are entitled to great weight, particularly where their age and maturity would make their input particularly meaningful" ( Gayle v. Muir , 211 AD3d 942 [2d Dept 2022]).

2024"While the express wishes of children are not controlling, for purposes of a best-interest analysis in a custody modification proceeding, they are entitled to great weight, particularly where their age and maturity would make their input particularly meaningful" ( Gayle v. Muir , 211 AD3d 942 [2d Dept 2022]).

2024The party seeking to modify an existing custody order must demonstrate a change in circumstances that reflects a genuine need for the modification so as to ensure the best interests of the child and, where this threshold is met, court then proceeds to the best interests analysis ( Trimble v. Trimble , 125 AD3d 1153 [3d Dept 2015]).

2024The party seeking to modify an existing custody order must demonstrate a change in circumstances that reflects a genuine need for the modification so as to ensure the best interests of the child and, where this threshold is met, court then proceeds to the best interests analysis ( Trimble v. Trimble , 125 AD3d 1153 [3d Dept 2015]).

1998As petitioner failed to demonstrate the existence of extraordinary circumstances, it was unnecessary for Family Court to engage in a best-interest analysis (see, Matter of Gray v Chambers, supra; Matter of Bisignano v Walz, 164 AD2d 317, 318 ).

1996As no extraordinary circumstances were demonstrated, Family Court erred in conducting a best-interest analysis in determining the application for custody (see, Matter of Bisignano v Walz, supra).

1998As petitioner failed to demonstrate the existence of extraordinary circumstances, it was unnecessary for Family Court to engage in a best-interest analysis (see, Matter of Gray v Chambers, supra; Matter of Bisignano v Walz, 164 AD2d 317, 318 ).

1990The determination of Family Court was based on findings that respondent’s abdication of her parental duties constituted a "subtle kind of neglect” and that the circumstances of the case fell within the Matter of Bennett v Jeffreys (supra) description of an unfortunate involuntary disruption of the custody of Jasmine over an extended period of time, such that extraordinary circumstances were shown, allowing application of a best-interest analysis, under which the court awarded custody to petitioner with liberal visitation to respondent.

1988Since the record is entirely devoid of any proof that petitioners were otherwise made aware of either the foregoing legal consequences of the consent they signed or of their statutory rights in connection therewith, petitioners have full standing to challenge these infirmities in the consent procedures (c f., Matter of Sarah K., supra, at 240-241; Matter of Daniel C., 99 AD2d 35, 38-42 , affd 63 NY2d 927 ).

1988Since the record is entirely devoid of any proof that petitioners were otherwise made aware of either the foregoing legal consequences of the consent they signed or of their statutory rights in connection therewith, petitioners have full standing to challenge these infirmities in the consent procedures (c f., Matter of Sarah K., supra, at 240-241; Matter of Daniel C., 99 AD2d 35, 38-42 , affd 63 NY2d 927 ).