The New York Appellate Division recently ruled in the case of Matter of Adames v. Digangi, reinstating a father's petition for custody of his child. This decision impacts the ongoing custody dispute between David Adames and Alexandra Digangi, who are the parents of a child born in December 2023. The ruling emphasizes the importance of proper jurisdiction in custody cases, especially when multiple states are involved.
The case began when the mother, Alexandra Digangi, filed for custody in Hernando County, Florida, shortly after the child's birth. David Adames, the father, then initiated a custody proceeding in New York in February 2024. Digangi responded by moving to dismiss Adames' petition, claiming that the New York court lacked jurisdiction since the child was born in Florida, which she argued was the child's home state.
The Family Court in Suffolk County, led by Judge Rosamaria Abbate, agreed with Digangi's argument and dismissed Adames' petition on March 29, 2024. This dismissal prompted Adames to appeal the decision, leading to the recent ruling by the Appellate Division.
In its ruling on August 19, 2026, the Appellate Division reversed the Family Court's decision. The court stated, "the record does not show that the Family Court followed the procedures mandated under the Domestic Relations Law." The judges on the panel included Colleen D. Duffy, Janice A. Taylor, Lourdes M. Ventura, and Elena Goldberg Velazquez.
The Appellate Division found that the Family Court failed to communicate with the Florida court, which is a required step when determining jurisdiction in custody cases. The court noted that, according to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, a New York court cannot exercise jurisdiction if a custody proceeding has already begun in another state unless that proceeding has been terminated or stayed.
The Appellate Division's ruling reinstated Adames' custody petition and sent the case back to the Family Court for further proceedings. The court emphasized that the Family Court must now engage in the necessary communication with the Florida court to determine the appropriate jurisdiction for this custody dispute.
This ruling is significant as it highlights the legal complexities involved in custody cases that span multiple states. It underscores the necessity for courts to adhere to established procedures to ensure fair handling of custody matters. The decision also serves as a reminder that parents involved in custody disputes must navigate the legal frameworks of both states involved.
The reinstatement of Adames' petition means that the custody case will continue in New York, where the Family Court will now have to assess the situation in light of the Appellate Division's guidance. This may lead to a more thorough examination of the custody arrangements for the child.
Looking ahead, this ruling could set a precedent for how courts handle jurisdictional issues in custody cases involving multiple states. It reinforces the importance of following legal protocols to avoid dismissals based on jurisdictional misunderstandings.
As for what’s next, it remains to be seen how the Family Court will proceed following the Appellate Division's ruling. The case may still be subject to further appeals, depending on how the parties respond to the reinstated petition and the subsequent proceedings in Family Court.