Mohammed v. Aziz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mohammed v. Aziz

43 A.D.3d 1169, 841 N.Y.S.2d 795

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

DecidedSeptember 25, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 43 A.D.3d 1169 (Mohammed v. Aziz) 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

Mohammed v. Aziz, 43 A.D.3d 1169, 841 N.Y.S.2d 795 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Silber, J.), dated January 11, 2007, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (LaFreniere, S.M.), dated June 15, 2006, which, after a hearing, directed him, inter alia, to pay child support in the sum of $321.25 month.

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

The Family Court properly denied the father’s objections to the order dated June 15, 2006. Since the father presented insufficient evidence to determine his gross income, the Support Magistrate properly awarded child support based on the “needs” and “standard of living” of the child (Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1-b] [k]; see Amsellem v Amsellem, 15 AD3d 510, 511 [2005]; Mayer v Mayer, 291 AD2d 384, 385 [2002]). Prudenti, P.J., Santucci, Fisher and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.

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

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Silber, J.), dated January 11, 2007, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (LaFreniere, S.M.), dated June 15, 2006, which, after a hearing, directed him, inter alia, to pay child support in the sum of $321.25 month.

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

The Family Court properly denied the father’s objections to the order dated June 15, 2006. Since the father presented insufficient evidence to determine his gross income, the Support Magistrate properly awarded child support based on the “needs” and “standard of living” of the child (Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1-b] [k]; see Amsellem v Amsellem, 15 AD3d 510, 511 [2005]; Mayer v Mayer, 291 AD2d 384, 385 [2002]). Prudenti, P.J., Santucci, Fisher and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.3d 1169, 841 N.Y.S.2d 795, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mohammed-v-aziz-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack