Lipscomb v. Lipscomb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lipscomb v. Lipscomb

6 A.D.3d 1202, 775 N.Y.S.2d 710, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6347

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

DecidedApril 30, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 6 A.D.3d 1202 (Lipscomb v. Lipscomb) 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

Lipscomb v. Lipscomb, 6 A.D.3d 1202, 775 N.Y.S.2d 710, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6347 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Patricia A. Maxwell, J.), entered February 7, 2003. The order confirmed the determination of a hearing examiner finding respondent in contempt for willfully violating a child support order.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: We reject the contention of respondent that Family Court erred in determining that he willfully violated a child support order. The record supports the court’s determination that respondent failed to present credible evidence that he was financially unable to comply with the order (see Matter of Powers v Powers, 86 NY2d 63, 70 [1995]; Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v Rosen, 289 AD2d 487, 488 [2001]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Lawton, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Patricia A. Maxwell, J.), entered February 7, 2003. The order confirmed the determination of a hearing examiner finding respondent in contempt for willfully violating a child support order.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: We reject the contention of respondent that Family Court erred in determining that he willfully violated a child support order. The record supports the court’s determination that respondent failed to present credible evidence that he was financially unable to comply with the order (see Matter of Powers v Powers, 86 NY2d 63, 70 [1995]; Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v Rosen, 289 AD2d 487, 488 [2001]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.3d 1202, 775 N.Y.S.2d 710, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lipscomb-v-lipscomb-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack