New York appellate court reverses custody and relocation denial, orders hearing

On June 18, 2025, the New York Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed a lower court order in a contested custody and relocation matter, finding the trial court denied a request for a custody modification and relocation without holding an evidentiary hearing. Barrows Levy PLLC represented the appellant.

The appeal arose after the trial court summarily denied the parents’ joint application to modify custody and relocate, preventing the parties from presenting full factual arguments at the trial level. The Appellate Division held that denying relief without a hearing was error where disputed facts were present.

The panel emphasized that when disagreements affect children’s best interests, an evidentiary hearing should occur so parties can present testimony and clarify disputed routines and logistics that commonly drive custody disputes. The ruling highlighted a due-process concern: summary denial can speed case resolution but has limits when the stakes involve where a child lives and how parenting time is set.

Barrows Levy argued the denial without a hearing deprived the moving party of due process and blocked meaningful consideration of the children’s best interests; the appellate panel agreed and remitted the matter for further proceedings. The Appellate Division also said an attorney should be appointed to represent the children, to track the case from the children’s perspective rather than either parent’s position.

new york appellate division, second department reversal, custody modification application, relocation denial without hearing, evidentiary hearing ordered, due process concern, barrows levy pllc, appointed attorney for children, children's best interests, remitted for further proceedings, summary denial error, parenting time logistics