Creamer v. Creamer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Creamer v. Creamer

305 A.D.2d 595, 759 N.Y.S.2d 385, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5693

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 19, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 305 A.D.2d 595 (Creamer v. Creamer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Creamer v. Creamer, 305 A.D.2d 595, 759 N.Y.S.2d 385, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5693 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Foskey, J.), dated January 7, 2002, which denied her objections to an order of the same court (Kahlon, H.E.), entered May 16, 2001, which, after a hearing, denied her petition to compel the father to pay a pro rata share of college expenses for two of the parties’ children.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Family Court properly denied the mother’s objections. The children wrongfully refused to visit with their father and thus forfeited their right to payment of college expenses by him (see Chamberlin v Chamberlin, 240 AD2d 908 [1997]; cf. Radin v Radin, 209 AD2d 396 [1994]).

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Feuerstein, McGinity and Schmidt, 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 from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Foskey, J.), dated January 7, 2002, which denied her objections to an order of the same court (Kahlon, H.E.), entered May 16, 2001, which, after a hearing, denied her petition to compel the father to pay a pro rata share of college expenses for two of the parties’ children.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Family Court properly denied the mother’s objections. The children wrongfully refused to visit with their father and thus forfeited their right to payment of college expenses by him (see Chamberlin v Chamberlin, 240 AD2d 908 [1997]; cf. Radin v Radin, 209 AD2d 396 [1994]).

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Feuerstein, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 A.D.2d 595, 759 N.Y.S.2d 385, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/creamer-v-creamer-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack