Articles Posted in Child Custody

|

There are different ways to handle a divorce in New York, including mediation, litigation, and collaborative divorce. How the divorce is handled can substantially affect the outcome and cost, but there are pros and cons to each approach.

Divorce mediation is a popular form of alternative dispute resolution. Mediation involves a voluntary settlement process that allows a couple opportunities to make their own decision about significant decisions, such as where the kids will live, parenting time or visitation, how property will be divided, and whether one spouse will pay support to the other. Often, divorce mediation is not appropriate for cases involving domestic violence. In contrast, litigation in which negotiations are unsuccessful can lead to a trial after which a judge will make important decisions for the couple.

A trained divorce mediator, who should be a neutral party with no prior affiliation with either spouse, conducts the mediation and sets the structure. Generally, it is a good idea for both parties to also have legal representation from separate review attorneys, if not before, then when an agreement is drafted. This provides added protection against any oversights that occur during mediation. The mediator should be experienced and very familiar with the  Domestic Relations Law and other laws governing divorce in New York.

Continue reading ›

|

The short answer is yes, if the best interests of the children suggests different parents should have custody, as the recent Long Island case summarized below illustrates.  Child custody battles everywhere, as in Nassau County, New York can be extremely difficult, both for the parents and for the children. If a couple is not able to mediate and come to an agreement between themselves, the court must often devise creative solutions to highly charged and sensitive problems. The best interests of the children are of paramount importance to the court when making a custody determination.

In Kramer v. Kramer, the New York Supreme Court of Nassau County considered an acrimonious child custody battle, within a divorce, in a dysfunctional family. The couple had married in 1992. The husband mostly worked as a construction supervisor. The wife completed a master’s degree in early childhood education at the time they married and worked for a short period at a Jewish school. After that, she stayed home to raise the kids. The case was filed in 2011. At the time she commenced divorce proceedings, seeking temporary sole custody of the kids, maintenance, and exclusive occupancy of the marital home, she was working as an event coordinator.

In the case, the wife alleged that the husband had drained their joint bank accounts and reduced his support for the kids and her. The defendant claimed the plaintiff, his wife, turned the three oldest of his four kids against him. He also claimed she was unstable and had an undiagnosed mental illness.

Continue reading ›

|

For child support cases proceeding in a New York Family Court, the court, pursuant to statute, should make a temporary child support order, while the case is ongoing, of an amount that is enough to meet the needs of the child.  According to the law, this should be done regardless of whether immediacy or an urgent need is shown.  The law provides that even if the financial disclosure, which is required to be provided ultimately in the case, has not been yet provided, that the court should still enter the order.  If the information that would be on the financial disclosure is already provided at the time the temporary order would be entered, such as income and assets of the respondent or the parent that should be paying child support, then the court should make the temporary child support order in accordance with the child support standards act formula.  If the information is not yet available, then the child support amount to be paid should be based on the child(ren)’s needs.

Ultimately, when the child support order is finalized, the court needs to make the final order according to the child support standards act formula, unless an acceptable agreement is made for a different amount between the parties.  The payor would then be given credit for any payments made under the temporary child support order that was in existence prior to the finalization of the case.  At times, the temporary order might have been in an amount more than the final order.  If that were the case, then the payor parent might have a credit against future support payments.  The court is to make the amount of child support due under the final order retroactive to the filing date of the petition for child support.  In cases where public assistance was involved, the order can go retroactive to the date that public assistance started.  Often times there are arrears for child support due at the time the final order was made.  The arrears may be because of the retroactive date that child support is due from or as a result of the possibility that the temporary child support order was lower than the final order.  Both reasons might be applicable.  Arrears, as well as the ongoing support payments, will need to be paid to the residential custodial parent as the child support order continues. Continue reading ›

|

The law in New York is that a non-biological, non-adoptive parent does not have standing to proceed in a court for custody or parenting time.  There is, however, a statute that allows grandparents standing to petition for custody and visitation under certain circumstances, which I have previously blogged about.  In Debra H. v Janice R., 14 N.Y.3d 576 (N.Y. 2010), New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals reaffirmed its rule that neither parents by the doctrine of equitable estoppel or people standing “in loco-parentis” to a child has standing to seek custody and visitation or parenting time in court.  The rule would be then that biological strangers that have not adopted a child cannot proceed in court in New York for custody and visitation.

Still applying this precedent, though, two different cases decided in different parts of New York, ended up with different results.  In one, the same sex partner was allowed to proceed with her custody case, in the other a domestic partner was found not to have standing.  The law was re-iterated in the Fourth Appellate Department, which covers part of upstate New York just this year, in 2015 in the case of Matter of Barone v Chapman-Cleland, 129 A.D.3d 1578 (2015) which stated that biology or adoption under our current statutes define what a parent is and stated that any change of this needs to come from the legislature.  In that case a same sex partner to a biological parent tried unsuccessfully to proceed in court on a case of custody and visitation.  The court ruled that this former partner did not have standing to proceed in court as a biological stranger that never adopted the child, despite the possibility that the person was very much like a parent to the child.  Continue reading ›

|

Fair Hearing when Challenging “Indicated Findings” by Child Protective Services or the

Administration For Children’s Services (CPS and ACS)

No matter what the reason behind a hearing may be, one thing that all of my clients should have access to is a fair hearing if they want it. The right to a fair trial is fundamental to the rule of law, and it applies to civil and criminal cases alike. The right to a fair trial or hearing requires a fair public hearing within a reasonable time by an impartial tribunal established by the law. This blog will cover exactly how a fair hearing should go when it is for the purpose of challenging an “indicated” finding by Child Protective Services.

So, if the case has proceeded to the scheduling of a hearing, that means a caseworker has investigated the case and made an initial determination that the case was “founded” or “indicated”. This means that they believed there was some credible evidence to believe that the allegations involving child neglect or abuse occurred. It also means that the person that was “indicated” or who the case was “founded” against made a timely request to challenge the finding. An administrative review happened after the timely challenge and the review did not overturn the initial indicated finding. Therefore the fair hearing is now scheduled. Continue reading ›

|

It’s important to recognize that step-parents are a common and familiar part of everyday life, and just like their partners, everyone may want to know their legal rights and responsibilities regarding their step-children. Over time, many step-parents who spend time with their step-children develop a strong attachment and commitment to those youngsters – taking responsibility for them on a moral and financial level. However, somewhat crucially, a step-parent doesn’t automatically receive standing in New York to ask a court for custody or parenting time rights if a mother and father are already legally established. Step-parents do not instantly receive the “parental authority”, including the rights, powers, duties, and responsibility of a biological mother or father, simply because they marry the child’s mother or father. Step parents do not gain parenting time and visitation rights except if they are legally appointed guardian, adopt or if there is a paternity finding for the step-parent.

Step-parents may be required to pay for child support, while married to the other parent of the child (ren) if the children involved are in danger of becoming “public charges”. Frequently, this information can act as an incentive to prompt parties into getting a divorced finalized, if other compelling reasons haven’t presented themselves. If the children are not in danger of becoming public charges, usually step-parents are not in danger of becoming obligated for child support of their spouse’s children, that is, unless they become a parent by the legal doctrine called equitable estoppel. Continue reading ›

|

The New Significant Other Phenomena

When it comes to dealing with visitation time, parenting rights, child custody, and child support – there are a lot of sensitive and complicated issues to consider. One set of situations I deal with somewhat frequently as a family lawyer within Long Island and in and around the City, are those that arise when a biological parent of a child – with rights regarding that child – gets a new significant other, or partner be it a girlfriend, boyfriend, husband or wife.

It’s a fact that is both inevitable and uncomfortable at the same time – when you engage in a divorce or break up with your partner, the chances are that you will eventually have to deal with your ex-partner getting involved with a new romantic interest. Likewise, life will go on for you and you too will find love again. Although this may not impact people who don’t have a child with their ex, it’s obvious that concerns can arise when a divorced couple have custody, visitation rights, and child support matters to consider. These issues can be sorted out through mediation, litigation, negotiations, or collaborative law. Continue reading ›

|

Why the Rutherford New York Custody Jurisdiction Decision Makes Sense

Recently, well-known actress Kelly Rutherford was ordered by the New York County Supreme Court to return her children to their father in Monaco, where they had been living after the father lost his U.S. visa. Rutherford argued that she felt “lawfully” unable to remove her children from the United States so that they could live with their father in a foreign country. However, she complied with the order that was given by the judge, demanding that the children be reunited with their father and returned to Monaco. Under the facts of the case, the decision of the New York Court makes sense – despite the personal feelings expressed by Rutherford herself.

Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act

The case makes sense under the law since according to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act, New York would not have been considered to be the residential home state of the children in question. The facts suggest that instead the children were simply visiting the state, and their mother, after a California court issued custody to the father, Daniel Giersch, in 2012. If another country or state had not been given jurisdiction and the children were present in New York, then the New York Court may have been able to take up the case. However, as the case stood, New York simply did not have jurisdiction to allow Rutherford custody. Continue reading ›

|

In New York family law, often whether or not travel by one parent to a foreign nation with the child(ren) should be permitted is an issue that arises. I often look to whether the other country is a signatory to the Hague Convention or not when looking at the issue. The Hague Abduction Convention in law is a form of treaty or accord that was developed by the Hague Conference. Treaties are a method of establishing international law. The concept offers a method for returning a child who was taken from one country that is a member of the Hague convention, to another. In other words, the purpose behind the convention is to offer protection to children against the potential damage that may be caused by international abduction by another parent or other person, prompting the quick return of any children involved back to their habitual residence country. The convention also helps to secure and organize the rights associated with access to a child in parental time or visitation.

The concept centers on the fact that matters of custody and visitation should be determined by the court in the residential or habitual country of the child, meaning that the Convention champions the best interests of the child, and provides the opportunity to access a civil remedy that is shared with the other member nations. Legal parties use the Hague Convention to preserve an existing child custody arrangement that was created before the child was wrongfully removed from a place or circumstance. This deters parents from crossing over international boundaries in an attempt to avoid the court orders of the home nation. Individuals often wonder why they may need to access the convention if they already have an order of custody, and the answer to this is that, firstly, alternative countries may not recognize New York or United States court orders. Continue reading ›

|

Special Immigrant Juvenile Status in New York                                                         

 

Immigration and family law come together in this area of law. Some children living in the U.S. without a legal immigration status may need to access humanitarian protection for reasons of abandonment, abuse, or neglect. Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) is a classification that may allow for vulnerable children to apply for permanent and lawful residence in the United States. To qualify for SIJS, the child must meet the following criteria:

  • Applicant must be under 21 years of age
  • Applicant must be unmarried
  • Applicant must be declared dependent within Juvenile court (this is where a family law attorney can be of assistance)
  • Reunification with one or both of the applicant’s parents must be considered not viable due reasons of neglect, abandonment, abuse, or a similar basis under the law
  • The court must determine that it is not in the best interests of the applicant to return to their last country of residence, or country of nationality.

There are numerous benefits to obtaining Special Immigrant Juvenile Status. Firstly, SIJS waives numerous forms of inadmissibility that could otherwise restrict an immigrant from establishing themselves as a permanent lawful resident. SIJS waives working without authorization, unlawful entry, certain immigration violations, and status as a public charge. Applying for SIJS requires the consideration of numerous steps, with the help of a trained attorney.

A juvenile court is the court within New York that has jurisdiction under the law to make determinations regarding the care and custody of children. In many states, this can refer to delinquency cases, dependency cases, or probate and guardianship matters. Continue reading ›

Contact Information
99 Jericho Turnpike #300-G
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (516) 333-6555

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

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

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2025, Law Office of Darren M. Shapiro
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design