Grosso v. Grosso

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Grosso v. Grosso

61 A.D.2d 984, 402 N.Y.S.2d 441, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10605

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

DecidedMarch 6, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 61 A.D.2d 984 (Grosso v. Grosso) 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

Grosso v. Grosso, 61 A.D.2d 984, 402 N.Y.S.2d 441, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10605 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to enforce the terms of an order of support, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated November 9, 1977, which, after a hearing, inter alia, increased appellant’s weekly support obligations and terminated the requirement that he pay for his children’s clothing. Order reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and proceeding remanded to the Family Court for a hearing consistent herewith. This proceeding seeks enforcement of appellant’s obligation to provide clothing for his children, which obligation was provided for in a stipulation of settlement which furnished the basis of a prior order of support. This proceeding could not be used as a vehicle for increasing appellant’s weekly support obligations. The manner in which the hearing was conducted contravened appellant’s due process rights in that it failed to adequately apprise him of the nature of the proceeding or afford him an opportunity to present evidence or cross-examine witnesses. Petitioner is free to initiate a proper proceeding for upward modification of support (see Family Ct Act, § 461) if she so chooses. Until such action is taken, the court should restrict itself to those issues which are properly before it. Latham, J. P., Cohalan, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to enforce the terms of an order of support, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Orange County, dated November 9, 1977, which, after a hearing, inter alia, increased appellant’s weekly support obligations and terminated the requirement that he pay for his children’s clothing. Order reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and proceeding remanded to the Family Court for a hearing consistent herewith. This proceeding seeks enforcement of appellant’s obligation to provide clothing for his children, which obligation was provided for in a stipulation of settlement which furnished the basis of a prior order of support. This proceeding could not be used as a vehicle for increasing appellant’s weekly support obligations. The manner in which the hearing was conducted contravened appellant’s due process rights in that it failed to adequately apprise him of the nature of the proceeding or afford him an opportunity to present evidence or cross-examine witnesses. Petitioner is free to initiate a proper proceeding for upward modification of support (see Family Ct Act, § 461) if she so chooses. Until such action is taken, the court should restrict itself to those issues which are properly before it. Latham, J. P., Cohalan, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 A.D.2d 984, 402 N.Y.S.2d 441, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10605, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grosso-v-grosso-nyappdiv-1978.