Vacca v. Vacca

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vacca v. Vacca

81 A.D.2d 673, 438 N.Y.S.2d 343, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11212

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

DecidedApril 27, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 81 A.D.2d 673 (Vacca v. Vacca) 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

Vacca v. Vacca, 81 A.D.2d 673, 438 N.Y.S.2d 343, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11212 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to article 4 of the Family Court Act, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated December 1, 1980, which, after a hearing, granted the petitioner’s applica[674]*674tion for an upward modification of the child support provisions of a judgment of divorce. Order reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and petition dismissed. Prior to their divorce the parties entered into a stipulation which fixed the appellant’s total support obligation at $60 per week. At the hearing, the petitioner failed to establish an unforeseen change of circumstances. We disagree with the Family Court’s conclusion that the expenses incurred as a result of their daughter’s recent emotional problems constitute grounds sufficient to modify the decree. No documentation of increased need as a result of this circumstance was adduced by the petitioner. Furthermore, appellant’s uncontradicted testimony was that all medical bills submitted to him have been paid. Accordingly, the Family Court erred in granting the application to increase the child support provisions of the decree (see Matter of Boden v Boden, 42 NY2d 210; Jaslow v Jaslow, 75 AD2d 876). Hopkins, J. P., Mangano, Rabin and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding pursuant to article 4 of the Family Court Act, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County, dated December 1, 1980, which, after a hearing, granted the petitioner’s applica[674]*674tion for an upward modification of the child support provisions of a judgment of divorce. Order reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and petition dismissed. Prior to their divorce the parties entered into a stipulation which fixed the appellant’s total support obligation at $60 per week. At the hearing, the petitioner failed to establish an unforeseen change of circumstances. We disagree with the Family Court’s conclusion that the expenses incurred as a result of their daughter’s recent emotional problems constitute grounds sufficient to modify the decree. No documentation of increased need as a result of this circumstance was adduced by the petitioner. Furthermore, appellant’s uncontradicted testimony was that all medical bills submitted to him have been paid. Accordingly, the Family Court erred in granting the application to increase the child support provisions of the decree (see Matter of Boden v Boden, 42 NY2d 210; Jaslow v Jaslow, 75 AD2d 876). Hopkins, J. P., Mangano, Rabin and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 A.D.2d 673, 438 N.Y.S.2d 343, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vacca-v-vacca-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack