Buscaglia on Behalf of Tutko v. Tutko
| Decision Date | 26 February 1982 |
| Citation | 448 N.Y.S.2d 337,86 A.D.2d 974 |
| Parties | In the Matter of the Application of Fred J. BUSCAGLIA, Commissioner of the Erie County Department of Social Services, on Behalf of Rose TUTKO, Appellant, v. Thomas J. TUTKO, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Robert E. Casey, Jr., Erie County Atty., by Peter Aiello, Buffalo, for petitioner.
Peter B. Carr, Lackawanna, for respondent.
Before DILLON, P. J., and HANCOCK, CALLAHAN, DOERR and BOOMER, JJ.
The petition seeks an order of support pursuant to article 4 of the Family Court Act. Respondent informed the court that he was willing to support his wife but would not support her children of a prior marriage because he was separated from her, and the children were in her custody. The court, without a hearing, directed that respondent pay $99.35 per month for the support of his wife, but found that respondent was not liable for the support of his stepchildren solely on the basis of the separation and the absence of custody. Petitioner appeals from that part of the order determining that respondent is not liable for the support of his stepchildren. There is no cross appeal.
The applicable statutes impose an obligation of support on a spouse or a parent and further provide that stepparents "shall in like manner be responsible for the support of children under the age of twenty one years" (Family Ct. Act, § 415; Social Services Law, § 101, subd. 1). Section 415 of the Family Court Act further provides that "its discretion, the court may require any such person to contribute a fair and reasonable sum for the support of such relative * * *."
"It has been held consistently that liability of a stepparent * * * may be imposed for the support of stepchildren provided that the minors are, or are likely to become, public charges" (Baird v. Baird, 45 A.D.2d 930, 357 N.Y.S.2d 327). It has long been recognized that separation from a spouse or lack of custody of stepchildren will not relieve a stepparent of that obligation (Matter of Director of Child Support Enforcement Bur. v. Fariello, 74 A.D.2d 905, 425 N.Y.S.2d 854; Matter of Mercer v. Mercer, 26 A.D.2d 450, 275 N.Y.S.2d 83; see, also, Baird v. Baird, supra). Accordingly, we remit to Family Court for a hearing and a determination in the exercise of its discretion of whether the respondent should pay support for his stepchildren and, if so, how much.
Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and matter...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
South Carolina Dept. of Social Services v. James C.D.
...of Child Support Enforcement Bureau v. Fariello, 74 A.D.2d 905, 425 N.Y.S.2d 854 (2nd Dept.1980); and Matter of Buscaglia v. Tutko, 86 A.D.2d 974, 448 N.Y.S.2d 337 (4th Dept.1982).4 It should be noted that the instant case involves only prospective suspension of support. The appropriateness......
-
Monroe County Dept. of Social Services on Behalf of Palermo v. Palermo
...v. Shang, 67 A.D.2d 926, 928, 412 N.Y.S.2d 923, aff'd 48 N.Y.2d 887, 424 N.Y.S.2d 896, 400 N.E.2d 1348; Matter of Buscaglia v. Tutko, 86 A.D.2d 974, 448 N.Y.S.2d 337; Besharov, Supp Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 29A, Family Ct Act § 415, 1993 Pocket Part, at 28). P......
-
Department of Social Services on Behalf of Daniel P v. Robert B
...stepparent, does not relieve the stepparent of the obligation of support created by Family Court Act, Section 415. [Buscaglia v. Tutko, 86 A.D.2d 974, 448 N.Y.S.2d 337 (1982).] The cases cited by the respondent have no bearing on the effect of Family Court Act, Section 415. Muller v. Muller......