Hamlin v. Kirnan

186 A.D.2d 1038, 588 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11614
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 7, 1992·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Respondent appeals from a Family Court order which denied his objections to the Decision and Order of a Hearing Examiner granting petitioner’s application for an upward modification in child support. The Hearing Examiner’s determination that respondent, a licensed real estate [1039]*1039broker, was capable of earning $20,000 per year was not contrary to the weight of evidence, and the imputation of that sum as respondent’s gross income was proper (see, Family Ct Act §413 [1] [b] [5] [v]; Hickland v Hickland, 39 NY2d 1; Weiner v Weiner, 97 Misc 2d 920). Also, the Hearing Examiner did not err in refusing to award respondent a credit towards arrears in child support for moneys he voluntarily paid for his son’s hockey equipment and related expenses (see, Horne v Horne, 22 NY2d 219, 223; Kerpen v Kerpen, 172 AD2d 496). (Appeal from Order of Onondaga County Family Court, Rossi, J. — Child Support.) Present — Denman, P. J., Balio, Lawton, Fallon and Davis, JJ.

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

Hamlin v. Kirnan, 186 A.D.2d 1038, 588 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11614 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

186 A.D.2d 1038 (Hamlin v. Kirnan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gleason v. Gleason
247 A.D.2d 384 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Mayeri v. Mayeri
220 A.D.2d 647 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)