People ex rel. Foote v. Stancari

179 A.D.2d 835

Opinion

Assuming arguendo that the instant proceeding has not been rendered academic by reason of the petitioner’s completion of his jail sentence (see, Matter of Williams v Cornelius, 76 NY2d 542; but see, Matter of Madison County Support Collection Unit v Drennan, 156 AD2d 883; Ward v Ward, 71 AD2d 854), we find his contentions to be without merit. A Hearing Examiner clearly has the authority to conduct a willfulness hearing pursuant to Family Court Act § 454 (see, Family Ct Act § 439 [a]), and the record fails to demonstrate that the petitioner raised any issue requiring a de novo willfulness hearing by a Family Court Judge. Moreover, we are satisfied that the Family Court acted properly in directing the petitioner’s commitment for nonpayment of child support (see, Family Ct Act § 454 [3] [a]), and that the petitioner received an adequate opportunity to cure his violation by making the required child support payments. Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Harwood and O’Brien, JJ., concur.