Ross v. Dittmar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ross v. Dittmar

229 A.D.2d 396, 644 N.Y.S.2d 643, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7593

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

DecidedJuly 1, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 229 A.D.2d 396 (Ross v. Dittmar) 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

Ross v. Dittmar, 229 A.D.2d 396, 644 N.Y.S.2d 643, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7593 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County (Warren, J.), entered May 10, 1995, which denied his objections to so much of an order of the same court (Miklitsch, H.E.), entered August 15, 1994, as, after a hearing, dismissed his petition for downward modification of child support and directed him to pay child support arrears in the sum of $2,356.50.

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

Contrary to the father’s contention, he failed to satisfy his burden of demonstrating a substantial change in circumstances since his last petition for modification which would warrant a further downward modification of his child support obligations (see, Matter of Sutera v Sutera, 204 AD2d 648; Matter of Leone v Leone, 137 AD2d 753, 755; Family Ct Act § 461 [b] [ii]). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County (Warren, J.), entered May 10, 1995, which denied his objections to so much of an order of the same court (Miklitsch, H.E.), entered August 15, 1994, as, after a hearing, dismissed his petition for downward modification of child support and directed him to pay child support arrears in the sum of $2,356.50.

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

Contrary to the father’s contention, he failed to satisfy his burden of demonstrating a substantial change in circumstances since his last petition for modification which would warrant a further downward modification of his child support obligations (see, Matter of Sutera v Sutera, 204 AD2d 648; Matter of Leone v Leone, 137 AD2d 753, 755; Family Ct Act § 461 [b] [ii]). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

229 A.D.2d 396, 644 N.Y.S.2d 643, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ross-v-dittmar-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack