James R.O. v. Cond-Arnold
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
To modify an existing custody arrangement, there must be a showing of a change in circumstances such that modification is required to ensure the best interests of the child (see Matter of Aronowich-Culhane v Fournier, 94 AD3d 1114 [2012]; Matter of Sparacio v Fitzgerald, 73 AD3d 790 [2010]; Matter of Russell v Russell, 72 AD3d 973 [2010]; Trinagel v Boyar, 70 AD3d 816 [2010]). The best interests of the child are determined by a review of the totality of the circumstances (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 171 [1982]; Matter of Wakefield v Wakefield, 74 AD3d 1213 [2010]; Matter of Ross v…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Eschbach v. EschbachNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Trinagel v. BoyarAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Sparacio v. FitzgeraldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Kerwin v. KerwinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Russell v. RussellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- C.H. v. F.M.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- MCCLINTON, JAIMYCE L. v. KIRKMAN, BARSUN U.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Matter of Cruz v. FigueroaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Matter of Oakley v. Cond-ArnoldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Matter of Ayers v. BabcockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.