A New York appellate court has upheld a Nebraska court's decision granting sole custody of a child to a father in a case that highlights the complexities of interstate custody disputes. The ruling affects parents involved in similar situations, emphasizing the importance of jurisdiction and proper legal procedures in custody matters.
The case, Marcano v. Suazo, was decided on September 30, 2026, by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, under docket number 2025-10091. The court's decision affirms a prior ruling from the Family Court of Queens County, which granted the father, Ramon A. Marcano, the authority to register and enforce a divorce decree issued by a Nebraska court.
Background
The parties involved in this case are Ramon A. Marcano and Daysis O. Suazo, who were married in Nebraska in 2020. They have one child, born the same year. In February 2024, Suazo filed for divorce in the District Court of Lancaster County, Nebraska. During the divorce proceedings, the Nebraska court issued a temporary order granting Suazo temporary custody of the child, while allowing Marcano limited parenting time.
However, in April 2025, Suazo left Nebraska with the child and moved to New York, violating the court's order. Following a trial in June 2025, where Suazo did not appear, the Nebraska court issued a decree of dissolution of marriage, awarding Marcano sole legal and physical custody of the child. Marcano then filed a petition in the Family Court of Queens County to register and enforce this divorce decree, leading to the current appeal.
The Ruling
The Appellate Division ruled in favor of Marcano, affirming the Family Court's order that allowed him to register and enforce the Nebraska divorce decree. The court found that Suazo did not provide sufficient evidence to contest the registration of the decree. Specifically, the court stated, "the mother did not demonstrate that the Nebraska court lacked jurisdiction to issue the Nebraska divorce decree, that the Nebraska divorce decree had been vacated, stayed, or modified, or that she did not receive notice in the divorce proceedings before the Nebraska court."
The ruling emphasized that under New York's Domestic Relations Law, courts must recognize and enforce registered child custody determinations from other states unless specific conditions are met. The court also noted that Suazo failed to establish any emergency that would allow New York to exercise temporary jurisdiction in this case.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for child custody cases involving parents from different states. It reinforces the principle that custody decisions made by courts in one state must be respected and enforced by courts in another state, as long as proper jurisdiction and notice are established. This case serves as a reminder for parents involved in custody disputes to adhere to legal procedures and court orders, especially when moving across state lines.
Furthermore, the decision may influence future cases where one parent attempts to relocate with a child without the other parent's consent or without following proper legal channels. It underscores the importance of understanding the legal ramifications of such actions and the potential consequences in custody determinations.
What's Next
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Suazo plans to appeal the decision. However, if she chooses to do so, it could lead to further legal proceedings concerning the custody arrangement and the enforcement of the Nebraska divorce decree.