Matter of Marsha v. v. Garfield V.

2020 NY Slip Op 3601, 184 A.D.3d 521, 124 N.Y.S.3d 542
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 25, 2020
Docket24305/17 11699A 11699
StatusPublished

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 3601 (Matter of Marsha v. v. Garfield V.) 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
Matter of Marsha v. v. Garfield V., 2020 NY Slip Op 3601, 184 A.D.3d 521, 124 N.Y.S.3d 542 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Matter of Marsha V. v Garfield V. (2020 NY Slip Op 03601)
Matter of Marsha V. v Garfield V.
2020 NY Slip Op 03601
Decided on June 25, 2020
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on June 25, 2020
Friedman, J.P., Richter, Gesmer, Oing, Singh, JJ.

24305/17 11699A 11699

[*1] In re Marsha V., Petitioner-Respondent,

v

Garfield ., Defendant-Appellant.


H. Fitzmore Harris, P.C., Bronx (Fitzmore Harris of counsel), for appellant.

Marsha Vaughan, respondent pro se.



Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Ruben A. Martino, J.), entered on or about March 7, 2019, which granted respondent father's motion for reargument and, upon reargument, denied his objection and confirmed the order of support and findings of the Support Magistrate, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Judge, entered on or about September 21, 2018, dismissing the father's objection as untimely, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as superceded by the appeal from the order granting reargument.

The court correctly determined that an award of child support to petitioner mother was proper. The record amply shows that the parties' children spent the majority of time in the mother's care and physical custody (see Bast v Rosoff, 91 NY2d 723 [1998]; Rubin v Della Salla, 107 AD3d 60 [1st Dept 2013]).

We have considered the father's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: JUNE 25, 2020

CLERK



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

Related

Bast v. Rossoff
697 N.E.2d 1009 (New York Court of Appeals, 1998)
Rubin v. Della Salla
107 A.D.3d 60 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 3601, 184 A.D.3d 521, 124 N.Y.S.3d 542, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-marsha-v-v-garfield-v-nyappdiv-2020.