Elena S. B. v. Michael T.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Elena S. B. v. Michael T.

235 A.D.2d 475, 652 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 391

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

DecidedJanuary 21, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 235 A.D.2d 475 (Elena S. B. v. Michael T.) 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

Elena S. B. v. Michael T., 235 A.D.2d 475, 652 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 391 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

In a paternity proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 5, the appeal is from so much of an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Willen, J.H.O.), dated August 21, 1995, as directed repayment of the amount which the appellant overpaid in child support by reducing the recalculated child support award by the amount of $20 per week.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The appellant’s contentions are without merit (see, Coleman v Coleman, 61 AD2d 757, 758; Grossman v Ostrow, 33 AD2d 1006; see also, Matter of Audrey G. v Robert T., 144 Misc 2d 313, 315).

The imposition of sanctions pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (c) is not warranted. Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a paternity proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 5, the appeal is from so much of an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Willen, J.H.O.), dated August 21, 1995, as directed repayment of the amount which the appellant overpaid in child support by reducing the recalculated child support award by the amount of $20 per week.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The appellant’s contentions are without merit (see, Coleman v Coleman, 61 AD2d 757, 758; Grossman v Ostrow, 33 AD2d 1006; see also, Matter of Audrey G. v Robert T., 144 Misc 2d 313, 315).

The imposition of sanctions pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (c) is not warranted. Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D.2d 475, 652 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elena-s-b-v-michael-t-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack