Narrative Opinion Summary
In the case of Naamye Nyarko B. v. Goodwin Edwin C., the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court reversed a Family Court order that allowed the respondent father to travel internationally with the children on 60 days' written notice to the petitioner mother. The court found that the Family Court erred in modifying the custody and visitation order to permit unrestricted international travel, particularly to Ghana, which is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Appellate Division determined that there was no substantial basis in the record to support the conclusion that such unrestricted travel was in the best interests of the children. The decision was entered on October 12, 2021, and was made by Justices Renwick, Kern, Oing, Mendez, and Rodriguez. The appeal was represented by the Law Offices of Randall S. Carmel for the appellant, Bruce A. Young for the respondent, and Andrew J. Baer as the attorney for the children.
Legal Issues Addressed
Best Interests of the Childsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Appellate Division determined that permitting unrestricted international travel was not in the best interests of the children, due to lack of substantial basis in the record.
Reasoning: The Appellate Division determined that there was no substantial basis in the record to support the conclusion that such unrestricted travel was in the best interests of the children.
International Child Abduction Concernssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court noted the significance of the destination country's status regarding the Hague Convention, impacting the decision on international travel permissions.
Reasoning: The court found that the Family Court erred in modifying the custody and visitation order to permit unrestricted international travel, particularly to Ghana, which is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Modification of Custody and Visitation Orderssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reversed a Family Court order that allowed the respondent father to travel internationally with the children, finding that the modification was not supported by the record.
Reasoning: The court found that the Family Court erred in modifying the custody and visitation order to permit unrestricted international travel, particularly to Ghana, which is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.