Monroe County Department of Social Services v. Reaves

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Monroe County Department of Social Services v. Reaves

172 A.D.2d 1042, 571 N.Y.S.2d 406, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6303

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

DecidedApril 26, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 172 A.D.2d 1042 (Monroe County Department of Social Services v. Reaves) 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

Monroe County Department of Social Services v. Reaves, 172 A.D.2d 1042, 571 N.Y.S.2d 406, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6303 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following Memorandum: To the extent that Family Court’s order ascertained respondent’s support obligation pur[1043]*1043suant to standards established by the Child Support Standards Act (see, Family Ct Act § 413), that determination should be affirmed (see, Matter of Monroe County Dept, of Social Servs. v Paola, 172 AD2d 1040 [decided herewith]). In receiving aid to dependent children, however, Ms. Wilson assigned to petitioner any support rights held by her or her family members (Social Services Law § 348). Thus, Family Court erred in failing to direct that respondent’s entire support obligation be paid to petitioner’s support collection unit (Family Ct Act § 571). (Appeal from Order of Monroe County Family Court, Maas, J.—Child Support.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Boomer, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following Memorandum: To the extent that Family Court’s order ascertained respondent’s support obligation pur[1043]*1043suant to standards established by the Child Support Standards Act (see, Family Ct Act § 413), that determination should be affirmed (see, Matter of Monroe County Dept, of Social Servs. v Paola, 172 AD2d 1040 [decided herewith]). In receiving aid to dependent children, however, Ms. Wilson assigned to petitioner any support rights held by her or her family members (Social Services Law § 348). Thus, Family Court erred in failing to direct that respondent’s entire support obligation be paid to petitioner’s support collection unit (Family Ct Act § 571). (Appeal from Order of Monroe County Family Court, Maas, J.—Child Support.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Boomer, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 A.D.2d 1042, 571 N.Y.S.2d 406, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/monroe-county-department-of-social-services-v-reaves-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack