Martinez v. Torres

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martinez v. Torres

59 A.D.3d 449, 871 N.Y.S.2d 916

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

DecidedFebruary 3, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 59 A.D.3d 449 (Martinez v. Torres) 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

Martinez v. Torres, 59 A.D.3d 449, 871 N.Y.S.2d 916 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Grosvenor, J.), dated October 15, 2007, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Shamahs, S.M.) dated June 19, 2007, which, after a hearing, denied his petition for a downward modification of his support obligation to $0 per month and to reduce the amount of the arrears which accrued prior to the filing of the petition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the father’s contention, Family Court Act § 413 (1) (a) does not mandate the issuance of minimum orders of child support against indigent noncustodial parents, and as such it does not violate 42 USC § 667 (b) (2) (see Matter of Jennifer R. v Michael C., 49 AD3d 443 [2008]; Aregano v Aregano, 289 AD2d 1081 [2001]).

The father’s remaining contentions are not properly before this Court and, in any event, are without merit. Skelos, J.E, Dillon, Angiolillo and Eng, JJ., concur.

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

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Grosvenor, J.), dated October 15, 2007, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Shamahs, S.M.) dated June 19, 2007, which, after a hearing, denied his petition for a downward modification of his support obligation to $0 per month and to reduce the amount of the arrears which accrued prior to the filing of the petition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the father’s contention, Family Court Act § 413 (1) (a) does not mandate the issuance of minimum orders of child support against indigent noncustodial parents, and as such it does not violate 42 USC § 667 (b) (2) (see Matter of Jennifer R. v Michael C., 49 AD3d 443 [2008]; Aregano v Aregano, 289 AD2d 1081 [2001]).

The father’s remaining contentions are not properly before this Court and, in any event, are without merit. Skelos, J.E, Dillon, Angiolillo and Eng, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.D.3d 449, 871 N.Y.S.2d 916, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martinez-v-torres-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack