Upcraft v. Tesoriero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Upcraft v. Tesoriero

206 A.D.2d 836, 616 N.Y.S.2d 304, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7735

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 206 A.D.2d 836 (Upcraft v. Tesoriero) 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

Upcraft v. Tesoriero, 206 A.D.2d 836, 616 N.Y.S.2d 304, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7735 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs and matter remitted to Oswego County Family Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Family Court found modification of respondent’s child support obligation appropriate but refused to apply the Child Support Standards Act (CSSA) without setting forth its reasons for refusing to do so. That was error (see, Family Ct Act § 413 [1] [g]). Thus, we vacate that part of the order appealed from setting the [837]*837amount of child support. Upon remittitur, the court must either set forth its reasons for refusing to apply the CSSA or apply the CSSA. If the court refuses to apply the CSSA, it must set an amount of child support that is appropriate in light of the reasons given. (Appeal from Order of Oswego County Family Court, Elliott, J.—Modify Support.) Present— Denman, P. J., Pine, Fallon, Callahan 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 and matter remitted to Oswego County Family Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Family Court found modification of respondent’s child support obligation appropriate but refused to apply the Child Support Standards Act (CSSA) without setting forth its reasons for refusing to do so. That was error (see, Family Ct Act § 413 [1] [g]). Thus, we vacate that part of the order appealed from setting the [837]*837amount of child support. Upon remittitur, the court must either set forth its reasons for refusing to apply the CSSA or apply the CSSA. If the court refuses to apply the CSSA, it must set an amount of child support that is appropriate in light of the reasons given. (Appeal from Order of Oswego County Family Court, Elliott, J.—Modify Support.) Present— Denman, P. J., Pine, Fallon, Callahan and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

206 A.D.2d 836, 616 N.Y.S.2d 304, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7735, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/upcraft-v-tesoriero-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack