Results-Driven Child Custody Attorney
As one of the leading child custody attorneys in the area, Mr. Corletta has over 40 years of experience handling child custody and visitation cases, which are often tried to the court. He understands how vital it is to keep your child(ren) in your life. He will do everything possible to protect your rights as a parent. Learn more about how he can help you with these specific cases below.
DWI & Traffic Law
How We Can Help During a Custody Case
Unlike other cases, which mostly focus on the parties, child custody cases have far-reaching ramifications affecting the entire family. With a highly experienced child custody lawyer like Mr. Corletta on your side, you can relax and worry about your emotional health rather than the logistics, strategy, and complexities of the case.
He will sit down with you, gather and organize all relevant information, and help you achieve the best possible outcome through settlement or trial. Don’t leave something as important as custody of or access to your child to chance. Contact Thomas A. Corletta today for proven legal expertise that can protect the integrity of your family.
What are the two aspects of custody?
1. Legal custody and 2. Physical custody or possession.
Who can make important decisions about a child’s care, such as medical care or religious upbringing?
Do I need a child custody lawyer?
Who is responsible for a child's physical care and supervision?
What is joint legal custody?
What is sole custody?
What should I expect at a child custody/visitation hearing or trial?
What is visitation and how does it work?
Who can get custody in Rochester, NY?
Can a parent move away with the child?
False allegations of Sexual Abuse are one of the most egregious things that can occur in litigation. Unfortunately, they are frequently used to gain leverage in Custody/Visitation disputes. Those who make such false allegations know courts often act preliminarily with kneejerk reactions, such as suspension of visitation and Orders of Protection, that often irreparably damage a parent’s relationship with an impressionable child.
It happened in a recent case Mr. Corletta handled in N.M. v. B.T. (Mon. Co. Fam. Ct., 5/2021).
In that case, Petitioner had filed no less than 5 Custody Petitions in less than four years against Mr. Corletta’s client, attempting to show Mr. Corletta’s client was unfit and restrict or take away the client’s access to the party’s child. Petitioner has not been successful in restricting access to the child.
This time, the Petitioner tried a different tack; false allegations of sexual abuse, purportedly coming from a 4-year-old, were completely uncorroborated by any medical or other evidence.
The problem with Petitioner’s latest approach was that in seeking a “Stay Away” Order of Protection in a Family Court Article 8 proceeding, Petitioner came into contact with Mr. Corletta’s knowledge of the law.
Hearsay, while allowed in Custody proceedings, is not allowed in Article 8 proceedings, where an Order of Protection is sought, due to the implications of an Order of Protection. Therefore, Petitioner’s attempt to use a 4-year-old’s hearsay statements was roundly rebuffed by Mr. Corletta, who made an immediate Motion to Dismiss, citing the fact that the Petition was based entirely on inadmissible hearsay.
Mr. Corletta supported this argument with Decisions from 3 of the 4 New York Appellate Divisions, which have ruled on this issue.
Aside from the hearsay statements of this 4-year-old, who would not be competent to testify in Court anyway, there was no other proof whatsoever, medical or otherwise.
Notwithstanding, Petitioner’s Court-appointed attorney and the Attorney For the Child, despite knowing the facts upon which the Petition was based were without evidentiary basis, continued to advocate for the exclusion of Mr. Corletta’s client from the child, based solely on Petitioner’s unsubstantiated claims.
Mr. Corletta further persisted in his argument, filing a Supplemental Memorandum of Law. The Referee ultimately agreed with Mr. Corletta, dismissing the Petition in its entirety and vacating the Order of Protection, thereby clearing Mr. Corletta’s client to exercise visitation with the young child, whom the client had not seen for six months.
This case illustrates the perniciousness of false allegations of Sexual Abuse, and as held by the Appellate Division in another case Mr. Corletta handled; Marino v. Marino 90 AD3d 1694 (4th Dept., 2011), parents who make false allegations of Sexual Abuse seeking to interfere with the other parent’s relationship with the child(ren) are presumptively unfit to parent.
Thomas A Corletta Attorney at Law
Rochester NY 14614
Monday – Friday
9:00 A.M. – 5:00 P.M.