A New York appellate court has ruled in a custody dispute that affects Dwight Jones and Tonya Serna, the parents of two children. The court's decision, made on June 26, 2026, upheld a lower court's order that suspended Jones' parenting time with the younger child. This ruling is significant as it highlights the court's focus on the best interests of the child in custody cases.

The case, officially titled Matter of Jones v. Serna, was filed under docket number 416 CAF 24-01923. The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York reviewed an order from the Family Court in Onondaga County, which had previously awarded Serna sole legal and physical custody of the children. The court also suspended Jones' access to the younger child.

Background

The parties involved in this case are Dwight Jones, the petitioner and father, and Tonya Serna, the respondent and mother. The couple has two children together, and their custody arrangement has been a matter of dispute since their separation. Jones initially sought to modify the existing custody and visitation arrangement, which granted Serna sole custody with limited supervised visitation for him.

The conflict escalated when Serna filed an order to show cause, requesting that the court suspend Jones' parenting time altogether. The Family Court held a hearing to determine whether the father's visitation rights should be modified based on the best interests of the children. During the hearing, evidence was presented regarding Jones' lack of engagement with the children and his failure to comply with previous court directives.

The Ruling

The Appellate Division unanimously upheld the Family Court's decision to suspend Jones' parenting time and access to the younger child. The ruling emphasized that the court had a sound basis for its determination. The judges involved in this decision included Lindley, Curran, Ogden, Nowak, and Delconte.

The court ruled that "the presumption [of visitation] may be rebutted when it is shown, by a preponderance of the evidence, that visitation would be harmful to the child."

The court found that Jones had not made a meaningful effort to maintain a relationship with the child, noting that he had not exercised any visitation for approximately five years. Additionally, the court highlighted that Jones had not provided gifts or shown interest in nurturing the relationship with the child during that time.

Furthermore, the ruling pointed out that Jones had engaged in inappropriate conversations with the child during supervised visits and had not complied with court directives. The court noted that he failed to download a communication application that was meant to facilitate communication with the mother regarding visitation.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for custody cases in New York. It underscores the importance of a parent's active involvement in their child's life and the court's willingness to suspend visitation rights if it is determined that such visitation would not be in the child's best interests. The case sets a precedent that emphasizes the need for parents to demonstrate a commitment to their children's well-being.

Moreover, the ruling serves as a reminder that the courts will consider a parent's behavior and compliance with court orders when making custody decisions. This decision may influence future custody disputes, particularly in cases where one parent seeks to limit the other parent's access to the children.

What's Next

As of now, it is unclear if Jones plans to appeal the decision. The court filing did not indicate any related cases pending. However, Jones may seek further legal options if he wishes to contest the ruling.