Lyda v. Lyda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lyda v. Lyda

286 A.D.2d 983, 730 N.Y.S.2d 914, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8975

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

DecidedSeptember 28, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 286 A.D.2d 983 (Lyda v. Lyda) 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

Lyda v. Lyda, 286 A.D.2d 983, 730 N.Y.S.2d 914, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8975 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying without a hearing the application of plaintiff for an order reducing his child support obligation and relieving him of his obligation to contribute to his children’s education. “It is well settled that on a motion for an upward or downward modification of support payments, a hearing is necessary on the issue of changed circumstances where the parties’ affidavits disclose the existence of genuine questions of fact” (Schnoor v Schnoor, 189 AD2d 809, 810; see, Stedfelt v Stedfelt, 258 AD2d 642; cf., Wells v Wells, 242 AD2d 934). We therefore reverse the order and remit the matter to Supreme Court for a hearing on the application. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Siracuse, J. — Support.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Hurlbutt, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying without a hearing the application of plaintiff for an order reducing his child support obligation and relieving him of his obligation to contribute to his children’s education. “It is well settled that on a motion for an upward or downward modification of support payments, a hearing is necessary on the issue of changed circumstances where the parties’ affidavits disclose the existence of genuine questions of fact” (Schnoor v Schnoor, 189 AD2d 809, 810; see, Stedfelt v Stedfelt, 258 AD2d 642; cf., Wells v Wells, 242 AD2d 934). We therefore reverse the order and remit the matter to Supreme Court for a hearing on the application. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Siracuse, J. — Support.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Hurlbutt, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 A.D.2d 983, 730 N.Y.S.2d 914, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8975, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lyda-v-lyda-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack