Ross v. Ross
This text of 297 A.D.2d 286 (Ross v. Ross) 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.
Opinion
[287]*287The father’s cross petition sought a downward modification of his support obligations under a judgment of divorce which is subject to the terms of a separation agreement that was incorporated but not merged into the judgment. Under such circumstances, the father must demonstrate “extreme hardship” (Matter of Cohen v Seletsky, 142 AD2d 111, 112; see Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b]). The Family Court properly determined that the father failed to do so (see Clark v Clark, 280 AD2d 575; Mishrick v Mishrick, 251 AD2d 558).
The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Smith, Friedmann and Adams, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
297 A.D.2d 286, 745 N.Y.2d 917, 745 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7794, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ross-v-ross-nyappdiv-2002.