Majid v. Commissioner of Social Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Majid v. Commissioner of Social Services

24 A.D.3d 251, 806 N.Y.S.2d 206

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

DecidedDecember 15, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.3d 251 (Majid v. Commissioner of Social Services) 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

Majid v. Commissioner of Social Services, 24 A.D.3d 251, 806 N.Y.S.2d 206 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Sara P Schechter, J.), entered on or about December 23, 2004, which denied petitioner’s objection to the Support Magistrate’s order dismissing with prejudice his petition to adjust arrears, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In a prior proceeding, this Court held that respondent could collect postjudgment interest on a judgment against petitioner for arrears of child support (Majid v Commissioner of Social Servs., 244 AD2d 187 [1997]). Accordingly, petitioner’s resurrected claim to the contrary is barred by res judicata (see Matter of Hunter, 4 NY3d 260, 269 [2005]). Petitioner’s new claim that the judgment is invalid because it was docketed in the wrong county could have been raised in the prior proceeding and is therefore also barred by res judicata (see id.). Concur—Tom, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Gonzalez and Malone, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County (Sara P Schechter, J.), entered on or about December 23, 2004, which denied petitioner’s objection to the Support Magistrate’s order dismissing with prejudice his petition to adjust arrears, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In a prior proceeding, this Court held that respondent could collect postjudgment interest on a judgment against petitioner for arrears of child support (Majid v Commissioner of Social Servs., 244 AD2d 187 [1997]). Accordingly, petitioner’s resurrected claim to the contrary is barred by res judicata (see Matter of Hunter, 4 NY3d 260, 269 [2005]). Petitioner’s new claim that the judgment is invalid because it was docketed in the wrong county could have been raised in the prior proceeding and is therefore also barred by res judicata (see id.). Concur—Tom, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Gonzalez and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.3d 251, 806 N.Y.S.2d 206, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/majid-v-commissioner-of-social-services-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack