I am a Manhattan and Staten Island based family law trial and appellate lawyer. I have been practicing in the New York Family Courts and the Appellate Courts for the first and second departments, which include all the 5 boros, for over 30 years. In that time I have handled over a thousand cases in family court of all types, including custody, visitation, child support, paternity, Guardianship, child neglect, Juvenile Delinquency , and Termination of parental rights of cases I have also handled over 30 appeals in the appellate courts. I am a summa cum laude graduate of Brooklyn Law Scholk where I graduated first in the full time day class of 400 law students.
Why my Experience in Both the family Court and the appellate Courts helps me do a better job for you.
I strongly believe that attorneys who deal with family court issues should ideally do both trial work and appellate work as these complement themselves very well.
Because I have handled over 1000 cases in the family court, including over 500 trials, if I am doing an appeal on a case that was handled by another trial lawyer, I can often spot additional issues that the trial lawyer did not. Having done in excess of 30 appeals of family court cases means that I have had the opportunity and time to go deeply into the law and understand at least some of the many issues in much greater depth than you would normally go into as a trial lawyer.
Furthermore, as an experienced appellate lawyer, I know very well how to make a record that gives my client the best chance of winning on appeal.
Difficulties with appeals of Custody cases.
There is case law that says that an appellate court should give a great deal of deference as to the trial judg’s decisions in custody cases. The rationale is that, most of the time, the character of the parent or person seeking custody of a child or children is one of the most important factos in the decision as to who gets custody. While the trial court judge has had the opportunity to observe the parties, including their demeanor and comportment in court, sometimes over a period of years, the appellate court, in most cases, only sees the written transcript, which does not show whether a party or witness’/ words were shouted, were sarcastic, etc. When cases turn on credibility and the trial court has found one of the parties to be not credible, it is very difficult to convince an appellate court to disregard the trial judge’s fiinding that one party was not credible. There are, however, a relatively small umber of cases where appellate cases have actually reversed the orders of the trial court because the appellate cour disagreed with the trial court’s assessment of credibility.
One case always comes to mind. I was not the trial lawyer on the case, but one of the parties was actually “stalking” me visiting my office without an appointment , trying to get me to take her case. I did not take the case.The party , a mother, was able to get an order of protection against the father in the trial cour, who found her testinony credible.The appellate Court, in a rare decision of this type, found her incredible because in her testinony she claimee that t the father had chased her out of the courthouse brandishing a firearm and he chasedsed her for several blocks in the middle of the day on a crowded street but no one intervened or called the police. Additionally, she never mentioned the gun in her sworn petition. Although this case was not a custody case, it is one of the few examples of a New York appellate court reversing a trial court based upon the appellate court making its own findings of credibility.
Difficulties with neglect and abuse cases on appeal
Child Neglect or abuse cases are particularly difficult to win on appeal. First of all, the burden of proof is “mere preponderance ” of the evidence, which is a low burden of proof for the child protective agency to prove neglect or abuse of a child. Second, there is a special hearsay exeption for the out of court testinony of a child. The child, who may be the only witness to the allegaions, often does not even have to testify and hence cannot be cross examined. Instead, an ACS worker or a police officer will testify as to what the child allegedly told him or her. Another problem that often comes up ion these cases is that the parent is arrested for the sane allegations and is reluctant to testify in Family Court to rebut the allegations, becaue of a concern about self – incremination. While people have the right to take the fifth amendment in the FAmily court, unlike criminal cases, the judge can and will take a negatie inference based upon the parent’s failure to testify.
Although Appellate Courts are very relucaant to revese the trial court’s finding of neglect, there have been some reversals. One case comes to mind where I was the original attorney for a man who was accused of sexually molesting his teen aged daughter. This man had a criminal case and he had an extremely competent criminal lawyer who tried and won the case in front of a jury in criminal court. This criminal lawyer, who had neer done a sex abuse case in the Family Court, neverthelss ended up taking over the case from me, and did an excellent job trying it, but still lost. The case was quite unusual in that, right after the child make the allegations, she checked herself into a psychiatric hospital. While in the hospital she was able to call the father and left a voiee mail, where she recanted the allegations she made against him. In family court recantations by children means next to nothing. The criminal lawyer did, however do an amazing job of preserving the record for possible appeal.By this time, the father had pretty much un ou tof money, but he was very fortunate that there was an attorney in his synagogue who did the appeal at a sharply discounted rate, and he won at appeal. aThe full decsion of this case can se can be found under Matter of Tamara G.
Representative Appellate Cases:
The following are some of the over 30 New York appellate cases that I have handled to date. The majority of these are family court cases that were decided in the first or second departments. One was a very complicated appeal of a matrimonial case which involved issues of equitable distribution, maintenance, and counsel fees. The list does not include juvenile delinquency cases where I won the appeal and the cases were sealed and not obtainable online and I had disposed of my case files, nor several recent cases where I have submitted my brief and am awaiting a decision.
Zacharie v. Pennicott, 249 A.D.3d 1062 (2026). Other attorneys: Richard L. Herzfeld; Liberty Aldrich; Janet Neustaetter.
Guerrero v. Santiago, 237 A.D.3d 816 (2025). Other attorneys: Lewis S. Calderon; Liberty Aldrich; Janet Neustaetter.
Jones v. Leneau, 234 A.D.3d 689 (2025). No other attorneys were listed in the decision.
Matter of Shayla G., 233 A.D.3d 682 (2024). Other attorneys: Muriel Goode-Trufant; Deborah A. Brenner; Susan Paulson; Twyla Carter; Dawne A. Mitchell; John A. Newbery; Kenneth M. Tuccillo.
Mendoza v. Riera, 232 A.D.3d 616 (2024). Other attorneys: David Laniado; Suzanne Niedzwiecki Lattime.
Matter of Aiden N.S.G., 218 A.D.3d 576 (2023). Other attorneys: Ira L. Eras; Ronna L. DeLoe.
Baez-Delgadillo v. Moya, 215 A.D.3d 829 (2023). Other attorneys: Jeffrey C. Bluth; Karen P. Simmons; Louise Feld; Janet Neustaetter.
Smith v. Bullock, 202 A.D.3d 697 (2022). Other attorneys: Tammi D. Pere; Karen P. Simmons; Janet Neustaetter; Eva D. Stein.
Matter of Je’laya J., 192 A.D.3d 1030 (2021). Other attorneys: James E. Johnson; Deborah A. Brenner; Kevin Osowski; Janet E. Sabel; Dawne A. Mitchell; Diane Pazar.
Ayar v. Akcay, 184 A.D.3d 636 (2020). Other attorney: Elliot Green.
Akcay v. Ayar, 184 A.D.3d 634 (2020). Other attorney: Elliot Green.
Miller v. Thompson, 184 A.D.3d 643 (2020). Other attorneys: Janis A. Parazzelli; Carol L. Kahn.
Irena K. v. Francesco S., 173 A.D.3d 580 (2019). Other attorneys: Beth E. Goldman; Amanda M. Beltz.
Carmen L. v. Rafael R., 163 A.D.3d 436 (2018). No other attorneys were listed in the decision.
Rankin v. Rankin, 111 A.D.3d 535 (2013). Other attorney: Lisa Zeiderman.
Solomon v. Solomon, 10 A.D.3d 584 (2004). Other attorneys: Alexander Carlin; Ingrid Gherman.
In re Venus Melody R.-W., 4 A.D.3d 182 (2004). Other attorneys: Patricia S. Colella; Ira L. Eras.
In re Raquel R., 273 A.D.2d 106 (2000). Other attorney: Elizabeth I. Freedman.
In re Christopher P., 260 A.D.2d 212 (1999). Other attorney: Elizabeth I. Freedman.
In re Robert S., 259 A.D.2d 339 (1999). Other attorney: Fay Ng.
In re Zoa B., 255 A.D.2d 273 (1998). Other attorney: Helen P. Brown.
In re Raul M., 248 A.D.2d 336 (1998). Other attorney: Helen P. Brown.
Paul W. Matthews, Esq.
Attorney at Law
90 Broad Street, 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10004
Phone: (347) 461-0760
© 2026 Paul W. Matthews, Esq. | Affordable-Uncontested-Divorce.com