The following documents were considered in connection with the motion by Order to Show Cause of the Plaintiff, dated September 15, 2025, (hereinafter "Motion Sequence No. 1"), seeking the entry of an Order granting the following relief:

1. Directing that all firearms, including licensed firearms, in Defendant's possession or control be removed from his possession pendente lite and surrendered to a local law enforcement agency;

2. Directing that certain firearms and ammunition surrendered to the Harrison Police Department and more fully described herein remain under the control of law enforcement pendente lite;

3. Issuing an Order awarding to Plaintiff exclusive use, occupancy and possession of the marital dwelling located at [REDACTED], New York together with the minor issue, J.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); and E.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX), to the exclusion of Defendant;

4. Directing that an Order of Protection issue in favor of Plaintiff and the children against Defendant;

5. Granting Plaintiff temporary sole legal custody of the minor issue, J.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); and E.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX);

6. Directing that Defendant be enjoined from contact and access with the children pending his submission to drug testing and evaluation and completion of appropriate treatment at [REDACTED] Treatment Center;

7. Affording to Plaintiff leave to make such further applications as may be necessary pendente lite; and,

8. For such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

Moreover, Motion Sequence No. 1 is also seeking this Court's entry of ex parte interim relief as follows:

1. ORDERED that pending further Order of this Court, Defendant is directed to surrender all firearms in his possession or control, licensed or otherwise, to a local enforcement agency; and, it is further;

2. ORDERED that pending further Order of this Court, certain firearms and ammunition that were surrendered to the Harrison Police Department shall remain under the control of law enforcement; and, it is further,

3. ORDERED, that pending further Order of this Court, the Defendant shall abide by a full stay away order of protection issued in favor of Plaintiff and the minor issue J.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); and E.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); and, it is further,

4. ORDERED, that pending further Order of this Court, Plaintiff is awarded exclusive use, occupancy, and possession of the marital dwelling located at [REDACTED], New York, together with the minor issue J.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); and E.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX), to the exclusion of Defendant and Defendant is directed to remain away from said residence; and, it is further,

5. ORDERED that, pending further Order of this Court, Plaintiff is awarded temporary sole legal custody of the minor issue J.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); and E.V. (d/o/b XX/XX/XXXX); and, it is further,

6. ORDERED that, pending further Order of this Court, Defendant is enjoined from contact and access with the children pending further order of this Court.

This matrimonial action was commenced on September 9, 2025, with Plaintiff's filing of a summons with notice and verified complaint (hereinafter the "Pleadings"),^[FN1] seeking the dissolution of the parties' marriage pursuant to New York State Domestic Relations Law §170(7), based on an alleged irretrievable breakdown of the marriage for a period in excess of six months. The Pleadings identify three unemancipated children of the marriage as follows: (1) J.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); (2) G.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); and, E.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX) (hereinafter the "Children").^[FN2]

On September 15, 2025, the Plaintiff filed Motion Sequence No. 1,^[FN3] seeking the above-[*2]referenced relief, as well as a request for judicial intervention.^[FN4] On the same day, this Court conformed Motion Sequence No. 1 (hereinafter "Conformed Order"),^[FN5] declining to grant any of the requested ex parte interim relief sought therein, and instead directing the following: (1) Defendant to be personally served with a copy of Motion Sequence No. 1, on or before September 16, 2025 by 12:00 p.m.; and, (2) all parties and counsel to appear in person on September 16, 2025 at 2:00 p.m. to engage in oral argument regarding the relief requested in Motion Sequence No. 1, wherein a briefing schedule would be provided if needed, also being the return date of Motion Sequence No. 1.

No other submissions were received with respect to Motion Sequence No. 1.

On September 16, 2025, prior to engaging in oral argument, Plaintiff and Plaintiff's counsel appeared before the undersigned, with no appearance made by Defendant. Plaintiff's counsel confirmed service on Defendant of Motion Sequence No. 1 as well as the Pleadings in this action, showing proof by the filing of affidavits of service for each set of documents (hereinafter "Proof of Service").^[FN6] The Proof of Service confirmed personal service of the Defendant with Motion Sequence No. 1 and the Pleadings, on September 16, 2025 at 11:55 a.m., in compliance with the directives of the Conformed Order. Additionally, the Court was advised by Plaintiff's counsel that Plaintiff had directly spoken by phone to the Defendant, a current in-patient resident of [REDACTED] Treatment Center (hereinafter "Treatment Center"), [REDACTED ADDRESS], and advised of the court appearance scheduled to resolve Motion Sequence No. 1. The Court noted on the record that the case was called at 2:45 p.m., 45 minutes after the scheduled time for all parties to have appeared, and Defendant still had not appeared before this Court or made an application to adjourn the proceeding.

Defendant was noted to have failed to appear pursuant to the Conformed Order of this Court, and oral argument continued in his absence regarding the relief sought in Motion Sequence No. 1.

Plaintiff's counsel advised this Court that the Defendant has voluntarily entered an in-patient rehabilitation treatment program at the Treatment Center based on continued and significant drug and substance abuse. Plaintiff advised that Defendant's admission at the Treatment Center would, at the earliest, end on September 24, 2025. However, prior to his voluntary rehabilitation, he has been essentially absent from the Plaintiff's and Children's lives, including coming home at all hours of the night, failing to care for the children, missing family trips, not engaging with the children, showing general anger and irritability, all presumably as a result of drug abuse and a generally volatile lifestyle.

This lifestyle also included claims by Plaintiff that Defendant regularly purchases an extensive amount of illicit drugs and frequents establishments known for soliciting prostitution on a regular basis. Notably, Plaintiff's claims regarding the Defendant's lifestyle, drug abuse and solicitation were confirmed for this Court by the affirmation of a licensed private investigator. [*3]Mr. Shawn Soler provided an affirmation (hereinafter "Investigation Affirmation"),^[FN7] filed in support of Motion Sequence No. 1, which detailed his personal surveillance of the Defendant for a period of six days: August 18, 2025; August 20, 2025; August 21, 2025; August 22, 2025; August 23, 2025; and, August 25, 2025. Within the Investigation Affirmation, Mr. Soler, a licensed private investigator and a retired NYPD officer with 21-years experience, detailed extensive travels of the Defendant within these six days, to and from known drug and prostitution areas in Westchester County, New York City, and New Jersey. Mr. Soler affirms witnessing hand-to-hand exchanges of unknown items, as well as lengthy stays in motels with unknown females, and goes as far as to suggest Defendant could be involved in potential drug trafficking of his own based on what was observed and his prior experience.

Plaintiff's counsel also made note of his client's fear for her safety and the safety of her children. One incident in particular is outlined within the affirmation of the Plaintiff (hereinafter "Plaintiff's Affirmation"),^[FN8] submitted in support of Motion Sequence No. 1, which involved Defendant becoming "angry" when Plaintiff insisted that he attend a doctor's appointment, and "in a fit of rage Defendant punched a hole in the wall of a closet in the master bedroom" as well as taking Plaintiff's phone from her, throwing it across the room, and grabbing her from behind, throwing her to the floor.^[FN9] This was only one example provided within Plaintiff's Affirmation which detailed Defendant's erratic, dangerous and potentially threatening behavior towards her.

Plaintiff also addressed Defendant's possession and access to, albeit legal, firearms which he would possess around the Children, without apparent rational concern for the dangers of such actions. This included possession such firearms at recreational sporting events for his minor Children. As a result of these abundant concerns, Plaintiff seeks the relief sought herein.

Several vehicles exist under New York State Law to protect litigants who are either impaired or incapacitated. Pursuant to New York State Civil Practice Law and Rules (hereinafter "CPLR") § 1202, a court may, on motion or sua sponte, appoint a guardian ad litem (hereinafter "GAL") for a litigant:

"(a) By whom motion made. The court in which an action is triable may appoint a guardian ad litem at any stage in the action upon its own initiative or upon the motion of:

1. an infant party if he is more than fourteen years of age; or

2. a relative, friend or a guardian, committee of the property, or conservator; or

3. any other party to the action if a motion has not been made under paragraph one or two within ten days after completion of service.

(b) Notice of motion. Notice of a motion for appointment of a guardian ad litem for a person shall be served upon the guardian of his property, upon his committee or upon his conservator, or if he has no such guardian, committee, or conservator, upon the person [*4]with whom he resides. Notice shall also be served upon the person who would be represented if he is more than fourteen years of age and has not been judicially declared to be incompetent.

(c) Consent. No order appointing a guardian ad litem shall be effective until a written consent of the proposed guardian has been submitted to the court together with an affidavit stating facts showing his ability to answer for any damage sustained by his negligence or misconduct."

The appointment of a GAL for a litigant has been held appropriate when a trial court has determined the individual to be in an "apparently chronic irrational and agitated state" resulting in the individual's inability to effectively litigate their case without assistance (Anonymous v. Anonymous, 256 AD2d 90 [1st Dept 1998]).

Here, based on the erratic, irrational and potentially dangerous behavior of Defendant, his admitted and apparent substance abuse, and the volatile lifestyle he had been portraying prior to his in-patient rehabilitation treatment, the Court has determined that the Defendant is unable to effectively defend the subject matrimonial action without the assistance of a GAL.

On September 16, 2025, based on this determination and upon recognizing the need for a GAL, this Court requested the immediate appearance of Ms. Dana Forster-Navins, Esq., 220 White Plains Road, Tarrytown, New York 10541, who after a second call of the calendar was able to appear in-person before the Court, following Plaintiff's oral argument on Motion Sequence No. 1. At that time, counsel Forster-Navins advised of her willingness to accept this Court's appointment as Defendant's GAL and to provide assistance to the Defendant as outlined herein-above. Notably, this Court's sua sponte appointment of a GAL for Defendant was consented to on the record by Plaintiff.

To effectuate this appointment, the following documents were reviewed, executed and filed in this matter on September 16, 2025: (1) a guardian ad litem order of appointment;^[FN10] (2) a guardian ad litem consent to appointment;^[FN11] and, (3) a guardian ad litem financial affirmation.^[FN12] The Court further directed Ms. Forster-Navins to communicate with the Defendant prior to the status conference scheduled herein-below, and to provide at that time an opinion on Defendant's ability to litigate this matter as a self-represented litigant, whether counsel will be retained, and any further information that the GAL can glean from making contact with the Defendant as it relates to the relief sought herein and the pending matrimonial action.

a. Exclusive Use and Occupancy of the Martial Residence.

The Appellate Division Second Department has provided guidance with respect to when a trial court may grant a party exclusive use and occupancy of a marital domicile during a [*5]matrimonial proceeding, providing:

"Courts are statutorily empowered to award one spouse temporary exclusive use and occupancy of the marital residence during the pendency of divorce proceedings (see Domestic Relations Law § 234). Such an order is appropriate only upon a showing that the relief is necessary to protect the safety of persons or property, or one spouse has voluntarily established an alternative residence and a return would cause domestic strife (see e.g. Taub v. Taub, 33 AD3d 612, 822 N.Y.S.2d 154). In light of the defendant's voluntary establishment of an alternative residence for herself and the existence of an acrimonious relationship between the parties, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination granting that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for temporary exclusive use and occupancy of the marital residence and denying that branch of the defendant's cross motion which was for temporary exclusive use and occupancy of the marital residence (see Amato v. Amato, 133 AD3d 695, 696, 21 N.Y.S.3d 104)."

(Goldman v. Amramova-Goldman, 185 AD3d 1012 [2d Dept 2020]).

While an award of exclusive occupancy generally requires the Court to hold a hearing before making such a determination, such an award may be made without a hearing upon the determination that persuasive evidence exists that such an award is necessary to protect the safety of persons and property (Formato v. Formato, 173 AD2d 274 [1st Dept 1991]).

Here, based upon the oral argument provided by Plaintiff, and the submissions received by the Court within Motion Sequence No. 1, this Court determines that persuasive evidence exists that an immediate award of exclusive occupancy, pending a hearing to be scheduled promptly by this Court, of the marital domicile to Plaintiff is necessary to protect the safety of persons and property. The Court makes this determination after having reviewed the submissions made by Plaintiff, which were not refuted by Defendant, including but not limited to the Investigation Affirmation detailing extensive surveillance efforts showing merely a glimpse of Defendant's erratic, irrational and potentially dangerous lifestyle.

Accordingly, until further Order of this Court, and completion of a hearing on the relief sought within Motion Sequence No. 1, to be scheduled at a status conference to be held as set forth herein, Plaintiff is awarded exclusive use and occupancy of the marital domicile located at [REDACTED], New York; and Defendant is hereby directed to remain at least five hundred feet from such property.

b. Sole Temporary Physical and Legal Custody of the Children.

"The paramount concern when making such a determination is the best interests of the child under the totality of the circumstances" (Burke v. Squires, 162 N.Y.S.3d 434 [2d Dept 2022]).

"Where possible, custody should be established on a long-term basis, 'at least so long as the custodial parent has not been shown to be unfit, or perhaps less fit, to continue as the proper custodian'" (Jackson v. Jackson, 31 AD3d 386 [2d Dept 2006], quoting, Obey v. Degling, 37 NY2d 768 [1975]).

"Factors to be considered include the relative fitness of the parents, the quality of the home environment, the parents' financial status, the parental guidance given to the child, the ability of each parent to provide for the child's emotional and intellectual development, and the [*6]effect an award of custody to one parent might have on the child's relationship with the other parent" (Hogan v. Hogan, 71 NYS.3d 601 [2d Dept 2018]).

"Entrusting the custody of young children to their parents jointly, especially where the shared responsibility and control includes alternating physical custody, is insupportable when parents are severely antagonistic and embattled" (Braiman v. Braiman, 407 N.Y.S.2d 449 [1978]).

"Moreover, pursuant to DRL § 240(1)(a), in any action or proceeding concerning custody or parental access where domestic violence is alleged, the court must consider the effect of such domestic violence upon the best interests of the child along with all the other relevant factors when the allegations of domestic violence are proven by a preponderance of the evidence" (Scott v. Thompson, 166 AD3d 627 [2d Dept 2018]).

Absent evidence of an emergency situation, prior to making a custody determination, even on an interim basis, the Court is required to hold a hearing (Rodger W. v. Samantha S., 95 AD3d 743 [1st Dept 2012]; Lela G. v. Shoshanah B., 151 AD3d 593 [1st Dept 2017]).

Here, the Court determines that an emergency situation exists arising out of the allegations made by Plaintiff, asserting that Defendant clearly presents a danger to she and the Children, which is corroborated by the documents and affirmations submitted in support of Motion Sequence No. 1 and as was provided by oral argument on September 16, 2025, warranting an immediate award of sole legal and physical custody of the Children to the Plaintiff until further Order of this Court and completion of a hearing on the relief sought within Motion Sequence No. 1, to be scheduled at a status conference to be held as set forth herein.

Accordingly, this Court hereby grants Plaintiff temporary sole legal and physical custody of the Children, subject to parental access time of Defendant as further ordered by this Court. The Court has made this determination having found that doing so is in the best interests of the Children, taking into consideration many factors, including but not limited to: the relative fitness of the parents, the potential dangers to the children, the quality of the home environment, the parents' financial status, the parental guidance given to the Children, the ability of each parent to provide for each child's emotional and intellectual development, and the effect an award of custody to one parent might have on the child's relationship with the other parent.

c. Temporary Order of Protection in Favor Of Plaintiff and the Children.

"It is well established that the party seeking an order of protection has the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the party for which the order is seeking to restrain has committed the alleged family offense, and whether a family offense has been committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the court, and its determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses are entitled to great weight" (Susan WW. On Behalf of Karri-Ann WW. v. Alan WW., 161 AD3d 1249, 1250 [3d Dept 2018]; Richardson v. Richardson, 80 AD3d 32 [2d Dept 2010]; see also Family Court Act § 812).

Here, while not specifically alleged by Plaintiff, her submissions and the oral argument placed on the record before this Court, set forth the allegation that Defendant committed a family offense arising out of harassment in the second degree.

Pertaining to harassment in the second degree, under Penal Law § 240.26:

"A person is guilty of harassment in the second degree when, with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person:

1. He or she strikes, shoves, kicks or otherwise subjects such other person to physical contact, or attempts or threatens to do the same; or

2. He or she follows a person in or about a public place or places; or

3. He or she engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts which alarm or seriously annoy such other person and which serve no legitimate purpose."

The Courts have held that intent required for a finding of family offense of harassment in the second degree may be inferred from surrounding circumstances and even a single incident is legally sufficient to support a finding that respondent committed a family offense (Richardson v. Brown, 173 AD3d 875 [2d Dept 2019]).

Based upon the testimony and evidence received by the Court within Motion Sequence No. 1, this Court determines that exigent circumstances exist to warrant the immediate entry of a temporary order of protection against Defendant in favor of Plaintiff and Children as requested in an interim basis until further Order of this Court and completion of a hearing on the relief sought within Motion Sequence No. 1, to be scheduled at a status conference to be held as set forth herein.

To effectuate this provision, a temporary order of protection ^[FN13] was entered immediately on September 16, 2025, prior to the entry of this Decision and Order, which was provided to the parties in Court, to remain in effect until September 15, 2026, directing that Defendant shall:

a. Stay away from A.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); J.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); and, E.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX);

b. Stay away from the home of A.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); J.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); and, E.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX);

c. Stay away from the school of J.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); and, E.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX);

d. Stay away from the business of A.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX);

e. Refrain from communication or any other contact by mail, telephone, e-mail, voice-mail or other electronic or any other means with A.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); J.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); and, E.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX), except for communication initiated by the children by text or otherwise;

f. Refrain from remotely controlling, monitoring or otherwise interfering with any electronic device or other object affecting the home, vehicle or property of A.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); J.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); and, E.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX) by connection through any means, including but not limited to, the internet, Bluetooth, a wired or wireless network, or other wireless technology;

g. Refrain from assault, stalking, harassment, aggravated harassment, menacing, reckless endangerment, strangulation, criminal obstruction of breathing or circulation, disorderly conduct, criminal mischief, sexual abuse, sexual misconduct, forcible touching, intimidation, threats, identity theft, grand larceny, coercion, unlawful dissemination or publication of intimate image(s) or any criminal offense against A.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); J.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); and, [*7]E.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX);

h. Refrain from and act that would constitute a Family Offense that create an unreasonable risk to the health, safety or welfare of A.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); J.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); G.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX); and, E.V. (D.O.B. XX/XX/XXXX);

i. Surrender any and all handguns, pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns and other firearms owned or possessed, including, but not limited to, the following: firearms, ammunition and permits and do not obtain any further guns or other firearms. Such surrender shall take place immediately, at Harrison Police Department; and,

j. It is further ordered that the license of the person against whom this order is issued to carry, possess, repair, sell or otherwise dispose of a firearm or firearms, if any, pursuant to Penal Law §400.00, is hereby [13A] suspended, and [13C] the person against whom this order is issued shall remain ineligible to receive a firearm license during the period of this order.

To the extent any interim relief pending a hearing and determination of Motion Sequence No. 1 has not been addressed herein, it is hereby denied. To the extent any interim relief has been granted herein, it has been granted based upon the Court's determination that an emergency situation exists warranting such relief without having first held a hearing, and that a hearing shall be scheduled to address such relief during the scheduled status conference outlined herein-below.

Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby:

ORDERED that the following is hereby appointed sua sponte as GAL for Defendant, with an appointment to continue until further order of this Court: Dana Forster-Navins, Esq., Dana Navins Family Law, 220 White Plains Road, Suite 500, Tarrytown NY 10591, Telephone: 914-618-4377, E-Mail: [email protected]; and it is further

ORDERED that by September 18, 2025, Dana Forster-Navins, Esq. shall register as a NYSCEF user in this action in the capacity as GAL for Defendant; and it is further

ORDERED that Dana Forster-Navins, Esq. previously executed and filed on September 16, 2025, the following documents on NYSCEF as set forth herein-above: (1) GAL Consent [See, NYSCEF Doc. No. 28]; and (2) GAL Financial Disclosure Affidavit [See, NYSCEF Doc. No. 29]; and it is further

ORDERED that any compensation of Dana Forster-Navins, Esq. as GAL for Defendant shall be made pursuant to CPLR § 1204 by application made by order to show cause with an accompanying affirmation of services rendered with annexed billing statements itemizing the services provided, the time spent for each service and the hourly rate requested for the services provided; and it is further

ORDERED that Motion Sequence No. 1 is granted to the extent that the interim relief requested therein is granted to the extent set forth herein; and it is further

ORDERED that, a status conference shall be held on September 30, 2025 at 9:00 a.m., wherein all parties, counsel and the GAL shall appear to confirm if Defendant is proceeding as a self-represented litigant or if he wishes to retain counsel, to schedule a hearing as to the interim relief granted herein, and to discuss a briefing schedule related to Motion Sequence No. 1; and it is further

ORDERED that a temporary order of protection was entered immediately on September 16, 2025 [See, NYSCEF Doc. No. 27] as outlined within this Decision and Order; and it is further

ORDERED that Plaintiff's counsel shall serve via Fed-Ex overnight traceable delivery and by e-mail to Defendant and the GAL, a copy of this Decision and Order with Notice of Entry by September 19, 2025, and shall file an Affidavit of Service on NYSCEF by that date; and it is further

ORDERED that Plaintiff's counsel shall order a copy of the Court Transcript from the September 16, 2025 appearance, shall pay the entire cost of same, and shall submit same to be so ordered by October 16, 2025; and it is further

ORDERED that to the extent any relief sought has not been granted, it is expressly denied.

The foregoing constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.