Gomez v. Gomez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gomez v. Gomez

79 A.D.3d 1125, 912 N.Y.S.2d 914

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 28, 2010·Published

Opinion

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Klein, J.), dated January 13, 2010, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (J. Patsalos, S.M.), dated November 6, 2009, which, after a hearing, granted the mother’s petition for an upward modification of his child support obligation pursuant to a stipulation of settlement which had been incorporated but not merged into the parties’ judgment of divorce.

Ordered that the order dated January 13, 2010, is affirmed, with costs.

[1126] Contrary to the father’s contentions, the Family Court did not err in granting the mother an upward modification of child support (see Family Ct Act § 413; Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b]; Matter of Brescia v Fitts, 56 NY2d 132, 141 [1982]; Matter of Love v Love, 303 AD2d 756, 757 [2003]; Weiss v Weiss, 294 AD2d 566 [2002]). Covello, J.P., Eng, Chambers and Hall, JJ., concur.

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

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Klein, J.), dated January 13, 2010, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (J. Patsalos, S.M.), dated November 6, 2009, which, after a hearing, granted the mother’s petition for an upward modification of his child support obligation pursuant to a stipulation of settlement which had been incorporated but not merged into the parties’ judgment of divorce.

Ordered that the order dated January 13, 2010, is affirmed, with costs.

[1126] Contrary to the father’s contentions, the Family Court did not err in granting the mother an upward modification of child support (see Family Ct Act § 413; Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b]; Matter of Brescia v Fitts, 56 NY2d 132, 141 [1982]; Matter of Love v Love, 303 AD2d 756, 757 [2003]; Weiss v Weiss, 294 AD2d 566 [2002]). Covello, J.P., Eng, Chambers and Hall, JJ., concur.

Gomez v. Gomez, 79 A.D.3d 1125, 912 N.Y.S.2d 914 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

79 A.D.3d 1125 (Gomez v. Gomez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related