Fatig v. DeRosa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fatig v. DeRosa

261 A.D.2d 954, 690 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5067

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 7, 1999·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[955]*955ment of divorce, she suffered an unanticipated disabling injury that prevented her from pursuing a nursing career. She is working only part time and her income is minimal, whereas respondent’s income has increased. Thus, petitioner met her burden (see, Matter of Boden v Boden, supra, at 213). The court properly applied the Child Support Standards Act guidelines in determining respondent’s child support obligations (see, Matter of Chappell v Chappell, 229 AD2d 952). (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Szczur, J. — Support.) Present— Lawton, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Callahan and Balio, JJ.

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

[955]*955ment of divorce, she suffered an unanticipated disabling injury that prevented her from pursuing a nursing career. She is working only part time and her income is minimal, whereas respondent’s income has increased. Thus, petitioner met her burden (see, Matter of Boden v Boden, supra, at 213). The court properly applied the Child Support Standards Act guidelines in determining respondent’s child support obligations (see, Matter of Chappell v Chappell, 229 AD2d 952). (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Szczur, J. — Support.) Present— Lawton, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Callahan and Balio, JJ.

Fatig v. DeRosa, 261 A.D.2d 954, 690 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5067 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

261 A.D.2d 954 (Fatig v. DeRosa) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related