A New York appellate court recently ruled on a case involving visitation rights for a paternal grandmother seeking to see her grandchild. The court's decision affects the grandmother, the maternal aunt who has custody of the child, and the child herself. The ruling clarifies the jurisdictional issues surrounding custody and visitation when a child relocates to another state.
The case, titled Matter of Elhalwany v. Martinez, was decided by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York on June 17, 2026, under docket number 2025-00744. The court affirmed a lower court's decision to dismiss the grandmother's petition for visitation rights, which she filed after the child had moved to Florida with her aunt.
Background
The parties involved in this case are Deborah Elhalwany, the paternal grandmother, and Teresa Martinez, the maternal aunt of the child. The dispute centers around visitation rights after the child was placed in the aunt's custody. In October 2022, the Family Court awarded temporary custody of the child to the aunt, who subsequently moved to Florida with the child.
By September 2023, the aunt was granted sole physical and legal custody of the child, and they continued to reside in Florida. In August 2024, the grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation rights under Domestic Relations Law § 72. The aunt responded by filing a motion to dismiss the grandmother's petition, arguing that the New York Family Court no longer had jurisdiction over the matter due to the child's relocation.
The Ruling
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's decision to dismiss the grandmother's petition for visitation. The ruling stated, "the court lacked exclusive, continuing jurisdiction," as the child had moved to Florida and had not maintained a significant connection to New York. The court noted that substantial evidence regarding the child’s welfare was no longer available in New York, which is crucial for jurisdictional matters under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act.
The court's decision also pointed out that the Family Court's reasoning for vacating its previous order, which was based on the impending retirement of the assigned judge, was not a valid ground for dismissal. However, the court concluded that the dismissal was appropriate because the jurisdiction had shifted to Florida.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for custody and visitation cases, especially when children relocate to different states. It reinforces the importance of maintaining jurisdictional authority in custody matters and highlights how a child's relocation can affect the rights of family members seeking visitation. The decision clarifies that if a child moves and establishes a new primary residence, the original court may lose jurisdiction over visitation requests.
The case sets a precedent for similar situations where custody and visitation rights are contested after a child moves to another state. It emphasizes the need for family members to understand how jurisdiction works in custody cases, particularly under the Domestic Relations Law and the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act.
What's Next
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether the grandmother plans to appeal this decision. There may also be related cases pending that involve custody and visitation disputes, but specific information was not provided.