Hecker v. Hecker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hecker v. Hecker

221 A.D.2d 318, 633 N.Y.S.2d 384, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11233

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 221 A.D.2d 318 (Hecker v. Hecker) 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

Hecker v. Hecker, 221 A.D.2d 318, 633 N.Y.S.2d 384, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11233 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a matrimonial action in which the parties were separated by judgment dated June 24, 1963, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brucia, J.), dated June 8, 1994, which, inter alia, without a hearing, denied his application for downward modification of the amount of alimony and additional support which he is obligated to pay the plaintiff.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

It is settled that in order to obtain a reduction of support or other financial provisions of a judgment of divorce or separation, the party seeking the reduction bears the burden of establishing a substantial change of circumstances (see, Nordhauser v Nordhauser, 130 AD2d 561; Tagarelli v Tagarelli, 50 AD2d 917, 918). Such a showing, however must be made initially by affidavit before the hearing processes of the court can be invoked (see, Hickland v Hickland, 56 AD2d 978, 979). The defendant’s conclusory allegations fall far short of creating issues of material fact necessitating a hearing with respect to the contentions of changed circumstances. Accordingly, summary disposition of the defendant’s motion was proper.

We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contention and conclude that it is without merit. Mangano, P. J., Miller, Santucci and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

—In a matrimonial action in which the parties were separated by judgment dated June 24, 1963, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brucia, J.), dated June 8, 1994, which, inter alia, without a hearing, denied his application for downward modification of the amount of alimony and additional support which he is obligated to pay the plaintiff.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

It is settled that in order to obtain a reduction of support or other financial provisions of a judgment of divorce or separation, the party seeking the reduction bears the burden of establishing a substantial change of circumstances (see, Nordhauser v Nordhauser, 130 AD2d 561; Tagarelli v Tagarelli, 50 AD2d 917, 918). Such a showing, however must be made initially by affidavit before the hearing processes of the court can be invoked (see, Hickland v Hickland, 56 AD2d 978, 979). The defendant’s conclusory allegations fall far short of creating issues of material fact necessitating a hearing with respect to the contentions of changed circumstances. Accordingly, summary disposition of the defendant’s motion was proper.

We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contention and conclude that it is without merit. Mangano, P. J., Miller, Santucci and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

221 A.D.2d 318, 633 N.Y.S.2d 384, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hecker-v-hecker-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack