Gonzales v. DeFilippis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gonzales v. DeFilippis

31 A.D.3d 447, 817 N.Y.S.2d 505

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

DecidedJuly 5, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 31 A.D.3d 447 (Gonzales v. DeFilippis) 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

Gonzales v. DeFilippis, 31 A.D.3d 447, 817 N.Y.S.2d 505 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County [448]*448(Edlitz, J.), entered September 19, 2005, which denied her objections to an order of the same court (Cabanillas Thompson, S.M.) entered July 8, 2005, which, after a hearing, denied her petition for an upward modification of child support.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the mother’s objections to the Support Magistrate’s determination that she failed to establish a substantial change in circumstances warranting an upward modification of child support (see Matter of Brescia v Fitts, 56 NY2d 132 [1982]; Matter of Roth v Bowman, 237 AD2d 447 [1997]). Schmidt, J.P., Santucci, Luciano and Rivera, 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, Westchester County [448]*448(Edlitz, J.), entered September 19, 2005, which denied her objections to an order of the same court (Cabanillas Thompson, S.M.) entered July 8, 2005, which, after a hearing, denied her petition for an upward modification of child support.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the mother’s objections to the Support Magistrate’s determination that she failed to establish a substantial change in circumstances warranting an upward modification of child support (see Matter of Brescia v Fitts, 56 NY2d 132 [1982]; Matter of Roth v Bowman, 237 AD2d 447 [1997]). Schmidt, J.P., Santucci, Luciano and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.3d 447, 817 N.Y.S.2d 505, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gonzales-v-defilippis-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack