Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the denial of the father's petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation. The court held that he failed to demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances and that his separate child support obligation could not, under the circumstances, justify reducing his obligation to the child at issue.
Holdings
- A party seeking a downward modification of a child support order must demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances warranting the modification.
- Under the circumstances, the father's support obligation for his son from a different relationship could not serve as a basis for downward modification of his obligation to the child involved in this proceeding.
Questions Presented
- Whether a party seeking a downward modification of a child support obligation must demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances.
- Whether the father's preexisting child support obligation for a child from another relationship supported a downward modification of his obligation for the child involved in this proceeding.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (7)
- Matter of Bouie v. Joseph, 91 A.D.3d 641, 642 (2012)(followed)
- Matter of Figueroa v. Herring, 61 A.D.3d 976, 977 (2009)(followed)
- Matter of Solis v. Marmolejos, 50 A.D.3d 691, 692 (2008)(followed)
- Matter of Levine-Seidman v. Seidman, 88 A.D.3d 883, 884 (2011)(followed)
- Matter of Harris v. Stiles, 78 A.D.3d 1053 (2010)(followed)
- Matter of Talty v. Talty, 42 A.D.3d 546, 547 (2007)(followed)
- Matter of Morena v. Morena, 267 A.D.2d 388, 389 (1999)(not expressly characterized)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…