Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirms a Family Court order denying a father's objections to a Support Magistrate's finding that he willfully violated a prior child support order. The court explained that failure to pay ordered child support constitutes prima facie evidence of a willful violation, shifting the burden to the respondent to demonstrate an inability to pay. Because the father failed to provide competent evidence of his income beyond public assistance, the lower court's determination was properly upheld.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Family Court erred in denying the father's objections to the Support Magistrate's order finding a willful violation of a child support order.
Holdings
- The Family Court properly denied the father's objections; the father's failure to pay child support constitutes prima facie evidence of a willful violation and he failed to meet his burden of showing inability to pay.
Key quotations
“In a proceeding to hold a parent in willful violation of an order of child support, evidence of a respondent's failure to pay child support as ordered constitutes prima facie evidence of a willful violation (see Family Ct Act § 454[3][a]; Matter of Signorile v. Kaminski, 116 AD3d 961, 962).”
Factual background
The mother and father are parents of a child born in 2008. The father failed to pay child support as ordered in a November 20, 2013 order, and the Support Magistrate found this failure to be a willful violation.
Procedural history
The father appealed the Family Court, Queens County's order dated June 5, 2024, which affirmed a Support Magistrate's order of disposition dated March 18, 2024 finding the father willfully violated a November 2013 child support order.