Apgar v. Apgar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Apgar v. Apgar

37 A.D.3d 598, 830 N.Y.S.2d 298

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 13, 2007·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Simeone, J.), dated March 23, 2006, as denied her objections to an order of the same court (Raimondi, S.M.), dated January 23, 2006, which, after a hearing, inter alia, granted the father’s petition for child support.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the mother’s contention, the Family Court did not err in denying her objections to the Support Magistrate’s order directing her to pay child support for the parties’ daugh[599] ter, who resides with the father (see Matter of Goodman v Manin, 243 AD2d 563, 564 [1997]; Matter of Eggert v Simpson, 224 AD2d 958, 959 [1996]). Further, the Family Court correctly calculated the mother’s child support obligation. The court need not rely upon a party’s own account of his or her finances, but may impute income based upon past income or demonstrated earning potential (see Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1-b] [b] [5] [iv], [v]; Bernstein v Bernstein, 18 AD3d 683, 684 [2005]; Chi-Yuan Hwang v Hwang, 308 AD2d 560, 561 [2003]).

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit. Crane, J.E, Rivera, Goldstein and Balkin, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Simeone, J.), dated March 23, 2006, as denied her objections to an order of the same court (Raimondi, S.M.), dated January 23, 2006, which, after a hearing, inter alia, granted the father’s petition for child support.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the mother’s contention, the Family Court did not err in denying her objections to the Support Magistrate’s order directing her to pay child support for the parties’ daugh[599] ter, who resides with the father (see Matter of Goodman v Manin, 243 AD2d 563, 564 [1997]; Matter of Eggert v Simpson, 224 AD2d 958, 959 [1996]). Further, the Family Court correctly calculated the mother’s child support obligation. The court need not rely upon a party’s own account of his or her finances, but may impute income based upon past income or demonstrated earning potential (see Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1-b] [b] [5] [iv], [v]; Bernstein v Bernstein, 18 AD3d 683, 684 [2005]; Chi-Yuan Hwang v Hwang, 308 AD2d 560, 561 [2003]).

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit. Crane, J.E, Rivera, Goldstein and Balkin, JJ., concur.

Apgar v. Apgar, 37 A.D.3d 598, 830 N.Y.S.2d 298 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

37 A.D.3d 598 (Apgar v. Apgar) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related