Matter of Shira L. (Zindel L.)

Annotate this Case
Matter of Matter of Shira L. (Zindel L.) 2012 NY Slip Op 08125 Decided on November 28, 2012 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 28, 2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
LEONARD B. AUSTIN
SHERI S. ROMAN, JJ.
2012-02777
(Docket Nos. V-05442-10, V-05443-10, V-05444-10, and V-14882-10)

[*1]In the Matter of Shira L. (Anonymous), appellant,

and

Zindel L. (Anonymous), respondent. Law Office of Brynde Berkowitz, P.C., Woodmere, N.Y., for appellant. Jay C. Shoulson, Long Island City, N.Y., for respondent. Roberta Chambers, Queens Village, N.Y., attorney for the children Aliza and Shlomo. Eric Perlmutter, Jamaica, N.Y., attorney for the child Azriel.




DECISION & ORDER

In related custody and visitation proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals, by permission, from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Hunt, J.), dated March 20, 2012, which awarded the father temporary unsupervised visitation with the parties' son Azriel.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the father temporary unsupervised visitation with the parties' son Azriel. Its determination had a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Boggio v Boggio, 96 AD3d 834; Matter of DeSimone v Delano, 94 AD3d 759; Matter of Crowder v Austin, 90 AD3d 753). The Family Court possessed adequate relevant information to enable it to make an informed and provident determination with respect to the best interests of that child and, therefore, an evidentiary hearing was not necessary to render a temporary visitation determination (see Matter of Donovan C., 65 AD3d 1041; Bibas v Bibas, 62 AD3d 924; McAvoy v Hannigan, 41 AD3d 791; Assini v Assini, 11 AD3d 417; Matter of Levande v Levande, 10 AD3d 723).
FLORIO, J.P., LEVENTHAL, AUSTIN and ROMAN, JJ., concur.

ENTER: [*2]

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.