Zabary v. Zabary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zabary v. Zabary

67 A.D.3d 695, 886 N.Y.S.2d 904

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

DecidedNovember 4, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 67 A.D.3d 695 (Zabary v. Zabary) 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

Zabary v. Zabary, 67 A.D.3d 695, 886 N.Y.S.2d 904 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Greenberg, J.), dated March 25, 2009, as denied her objections to so much of an order of the same court (Dwyer, S.M.), dated December 22, 2008, as, after a hearing, awarded the father the sum of $6,631.30 in educational expenses for the subject children and awarded her the sum of only $1,435.90 in educational and dental expenses for the subject children.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the mother’s contention, the Support Magistrate did not improvidently exercise its discretion in determining the mother’s share of educational expenses for the subject children (see Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1-b] [h]; Matter of Paccione v Paccione, 57 AD3d 900, 903-904 [2008]; Cimons v Cimons, 53 AD3d 125, 127, 129 [2008]; Matter of Poznik v Froebel, 1 AD3d 366, 367 [2003]).

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit. Mastro, J.P., Balkin, Eng and Leventhal, JJ., concur.

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

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Greenberg, J.), dated March 25, 2009, as denied her objections to so much of an order of the same court (Dwyer, S.M.), dated December 22, 2008, as, after a hearing, awarded the father the sum of $6,631.30 in educational expenses for the subject children and awarded her the sum of only $1,435.90 in educational and dental expenses for the subject children.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the mother’s contention, the Support Magistrate did not improvidently exercise its discretion in determining the mother’s share of educational expenses for the subject children (see Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1-b] [h]; Matter of Paccione v Paccione, 57 AD3d 900, 903-904 [2008]; Cimons v Cimons, 53 AD3d 125, 127, 129 [2008]; Matter of Poznik v Froebel, 1 AD3d 366, 367 [2003]).

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit. Mastro, J.P., Balkin, Eng and Leventhal, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 A.D.3d 695, 886 N.Y.S.2d 904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zabary-v-zabary-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack