Duma v. Edgar

Summary

The New York Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed an order modifying a child-support obligation upward. The court held that Family Court properly precluded the respondent from presenting financial evidence because his failure to provide meaningful financial disclosure was willful and contumacious, while noting that he was still permitted to testify about his studies and employment history.

Holdings

1. Preclusion was proper because respondent’s failure to provide meaningful financial disclosure, despite warnings and an adjournment, supported an inference that his noncompliance was willful, deliberate, and contumacious; therefore, the Support Magistrate did not abuse her discretion by resolving financial issues in petitioner’s favor.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Family Court and the Support Magistrate abused their discretion by precluding respondent from presenting proof concerning his financial circumstances because of his inadequate and evasive disclosure.

Disposition

affirmed