Roman v. Roman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Roman v. Roman

8 A.D.3d 394, 777 N.Y.S.2d 746, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7779

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 7, 2004·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Edlitz, J.), dated July 11, 2001, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Kava, H.E.), dated May 11, 2001, dismissing his petitions for modification of his child support obligation without prejudice.

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

[395]*395Contrary to the father’s contention, the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in determining that his petitions for modification of his child support obligation were premature.

To the extent that the father requests that this Court vacate or nullify a separate order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated May 4, 2000, we lack jurisdiction to review such order as the father did not appeal from it (see Palumbo v Palumbo, 298 AD2d 373 [2002]).

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J.P., Adams, Cozier and Rivera, 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, Westchester County (Edlitz, J.), dated July 11, 2001, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Kava, H.E.), dated May 11, 2001, dismissing his petitions for modification of his child support obligation without prejudice.

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

[395]*395Contrary to the father’s contention, the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in determining that his petitions for modification of his child support obligation were premature.

To the extent that the father requests that this Court vacate or nullify a separate order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated May 4, 2000, we lack jurisdiction to review such order as the father did not appeal from it (see Palumbo v Palumbo, 298 AD2d 373 [2002]).

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J.P., Adams, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Roman v. Roman, 8 A.D.3d 394, 777 N.Y.S.2d 746, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7779 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

8 A.D.3d 394 (Roman v. Roman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related