Matter of Samuel A. v Aidarina S.

Matter of Matter of Samuel A. v Aidarina S. 2012 NY Slip Op 06562 Decided on October 2, 2012 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on October 2, 2012
Friedman, J.P., Acosta, Renwick, Richter, Abdus-Salaam, JJ. 8156-
8157

[*1]In re Samuel A., Petitioner-Appellant,

v

Aidarina S., Respondent-Respondent.




Leslie S. Lowenstein, Woodmere, for appellant.
Tennille M. Tatum-Evans, New York, for respondent.

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Myrna Martinez-Perez, J.), entered on or about April 25, 2011, which dismissed petitioner father's petition to modify custody and visitation, and order, same court, Judge and entry date, which suspended petitioner's visitation with the subject children until he discloses to the mother where the children are being taken during weekend visitation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Family Court properly declined to conduct a full evidentiary hearing with respect to the petition, as petitioner failed to make any showing that modification of the custody and visitation
order is warranted on the grounds alleged in the petition (Matter of Patricia C. v Bruce L., 46 AD3d 399 [1st Dept 2007]; David W. v Julia W., 158 AD2d 1, 6-7 [1st Dept 1990]). Indeed, petitioner admitted that he had failed to visit with the children for at least five months, and there is no indication that joint custody is in the best interests of the children, particularly given the acrimonious relationship between the parties.

Family Court properly suspended petitioner's visitation until he reveals to the mother where he takes the children during visitation, as petitioner disregarded the court's direct order to reveal that information during the hearing on his petition. Under these exceptional circumstances, petitioner has forfeited his right to visitation (see Weiss v Weiss, 52 NY2d 170, 175 [1981]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: OCTOBER 2, 2012

CLERK