Matter of Rodriguez v Bello

Annotate this Case
Matter of Matter of Rodriguez v Bello 2012 NY Slip Op 07304 Decided on November 7, 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 7, 2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
RUTH C. BALKIN
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JJ.
2011-10502
(Docket No. V-2759-09/10A)

[*1]In the Matter of Guadalupe Rodriguez, respondent,

v

Jenny Bello, appellant.




Michael D. Meth, Chester, N.Y., for appellant.
Robert M. Rametta, Goshen, N.Y., for respondent.
John A. Pappalardo, White Plains, N.Y., attorney for the child.


DECISION & ORDER

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Currier-Woods, J.), dated September 29, 2011, as, after a hearing, granted the father's petition to modify a prior order of the same court dated September 8, 2009, awarding her primary physical custody of the parties' child, so as to award him primary physical custody of the child.

ORDERED that the order dated September 29, 2011, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court erred in admitting into evidence the report of the Mental Health Assessment Team, since the report was not submitted under oath and the expert was not "present and available for cross-examination" (22 NYCRR 202.16[g][2]; see Matter of D'Esposito v Kepler, 14 AD3d 509, 510). Nevertheless, without consideration of the report, a sound and substantial basis exists in the record to support the Family Court's determination to award primary physical custody of the parties' child to the father. Accordingly, that determination should not be disturbed (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 171; Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, 55 NY2d 89, 95; Matter of Coyne v Coyne, 150 AD2d 573, 574).
RIVERA, J.P., BALKIN, LEVENTHAL and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

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.