Back to feedAnalyzed Oct 16, 2026
(the mother loses custody modification request)CivilCourt of AppealsAppeal
Matter of S.R. v. E.C.
- Court
- Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- Decided
- Oct 15, 2026
- Docket
- Docket No. V-21453-23/24 V-21454-23/24 V-23411-23/24 V-23412-23/24|Appeal No. 7262|Case No. 2025-08002|
- Judges
- Not listed
Cited as2026 NY Slip Op 06032
Detailed analysis & 3-line summary
AI breakdown
Where this case stands
Family Court: the mother's petition to modify custody.
This decision · Appeal
(the mother loses custody modification request)
TL;DR
- 1A mother sought to change custody after moving into a new apartment.
- 2The court upheld the 's decision to dismiss her request.
- 3The key reason was that she didn't show a significant change in circumstances.
Key issues
- 1
Did the mother show a material change in circumstances?
Holding · No, her testimonies did not support a change needed for custody modification.
Why it matters
This decision impacts the mother's ability to modify custody arrangements, affecting her access to her children.
If you were the judge?
Mother wants to change custody after moving into a new apartment. Should the court agree?
- 1A mother asks the court to change custody after getting a two-bedroom apartment.
- 2She claims she's built a better relationship with her kids since the last ruling.
- 3The father wants to keep the current custody order, saying no significant changes have occurred.
Should the mother's request to change custody be ?
Vote to earn 10 Verdict Points
Parties
Appellant
Matter of S.R.
Appellee
E.C.
Roles are inferred from the case caption.
Opinion of the court
Matter of S.R. v E.C.
2026 NY Slip Op 06032
October 15, 2026
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
In the Matter of S.R., Petitioner-Appellant,
v
E.C., Respondent-Respondent.
Decided and Entered: October 15, 2026
Docket No. V-21453-23/24 V-21454-23/24 V-23411-23/24 V-23412-23/24|Appeal No. 7262|Case No. 2025-08002|
Before: Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Shulman, Rodriguez, Higgitt, Rosado, JJ.
Law Office of Thomas R. Villecco, P.C., New York (Thomas R. Villecco of counsel), for appellant.
Larry S. Bachner, New York, for respondent.
Janet Neustaetter, The Children's Law Center, Brooklyn (Eva D. Stein of counsel), attorney for children.
[*1]
Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Lisa A. Daley, J.), entered on or about November 19, 2025, which granted respondent father's application to dismiss petitioner mother's petition seeking modification of a final order of custody entered on or about November 6, 2023, to the extent of dismissing the petition without prejudice, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
There is a sound and substantial basis in the record to support Family Court's dismissal of the petition, as the mother's testimony failed to show a material change in circumstances warranting modification of the November 6, 2023, custody order (see Matter of Keidy A.R. v Timothy L.L., 233 AD3d 630, 630-631 [1st Dept 2024]). The mother's testimony, which primarily focused on the fact that that she had obtained a two-bedroom apartment and grown closer to the subject children since the issuance of the prior custody order, which awarded physical custody to the father, with parenting time for the mother, did not establish a material change of circumstances requiring a modification to protect the continued best interests of the children (see id.; Whitter v Ramroop, 93 AD3d 604, 604 [1st Dept 2012]). The mother was not automatically entitled to a best interest hearing, as she failed to make an evidentiary showing sufficient to warrant it (see Matter of Ronald S. v Deirdre R., 62 AD3d 593, 594 [1st Dept 2009]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: October 15, 2026