Conway v. Conway
| Decision Date | 21 December 2010 |
| Citation | 79 A.D.3d 965,912 N.Y.S.2d 700 |
| Parties | Karen A. CONWAY, respondent, v. Thomas E. CONWAY, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Madhureema Gupta, Jackson Heights, N.Y., for appellant.
JOSEPH COVELLO, J.P., DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO, THOMAS A. DICKERSON, and ARIEL E. BELEN, JJ.
In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment entered March 25, 2008, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Zimmerman, J.), entered March 17, 2009, which denied, without a hearing, his motion for a downward modification of his child support obligation.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The defendant moved for a downward modification of his child support obligation, contending that he was unemployed and that there had been a substantial change in his financial circumstances since the time of the judgment of divorce, when the Supreme Court had determined that he was earning $38,000 per year. Where child support obligations are set by the court in a divorce action and not by stipulation, a court may modify a prior order or judgment as to child support "upon a showing of ... a substantial change in circumstance ... including financial hardship" (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B][9][b][1]; see Pollack v. Pollack, 3 A.D.3d 482, 483, 770 N.Y.S.2d 435). "The party seeking modification of a support order has the burden of establishing the existence of a substantial change in circumstances warranting the modification" ( Matter of Perrego v. Perrego, 63 A.D.3d 1072, 1073, 884 N.Y.S.2d 70; see Matter of Nieves-Ford v. Gordon, 47 A.D.3d 936, 850 N.Y.S.2d 588). "[A] hearing is necessary on the issue of changed circumstances where the parties' affidavits disclose the existence of genuine questions of fact" ( Schnoor v. Schnoor, 189 A.D.2d 809, 810, 592 N.Y.S.2d 460; see generally Wyser-Pratte v. Wyser-Pratte, 66 N.Y.2d 715, 716-717, 496 N.Y.S.2d 991, 487 N.E.2d 901).
"A parent's loss of employment may constitute a change of circumstances warranting a downward modification where he or she has diligently sought re-employment" ( Reynolds v. Reynolds, 300 A.D.2d 645, 646, 753 N.Y.S.2d 106; see Matter of Ketcham v. Crawford, 1 A.D.3d 359, 360-361, 767 N.Y.S.2d 47; Matter of Meyer v. Meyer, 205 A.D.2d 784, 614 N.Y.S.2d 42). Here, the defendant failed to make a prima facie showing that he was diligently seeking employment. Furthermore, although he asserted that he was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ritchey v. Ritchey
...disclose the existence of genuine questions of fact” ( Schnoor v. Schnoor, 189 A.D.2d 809, 810, 592 N.Y.S.2d 460; see Conway v. Conway, 79 A.D.3d 965, 912 N.Y.S.2d 700; David v. David, 54 A.D.3d 714, 864 N.Y.S.2d 76; see generally Wyser–Pratte v. Wyser–Pratte, 66 N.Y.2d 715, 716–717, 496 N.......
-
Schwaber v. Schwaber
...sought re-employment commensurate with his earning capacity ( see Baker v. Baker, 83 A.D.3d 977, 978, 922 N.Y.S.2d 442; Conway v. Conway, 79 A.D.3d 965, 912 N.Y.S.2d 700; Barson v. Barson, 32 A.D.3d 872, 873, 821 N.Y.S.2d 237). [91 A.D.3d 940] Moreover, the defendant's statement of net wort......
-
Bruzzese v. Bruzzese
...submit any evidence to substantiate her contention that she suffers from a disability rendering her unable to work (see Conway v. Conway, 79 A.D.3d 965, 912 N.Y.S.2d 700 ). The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in declining to appoint a receiver to immediately sell the plai......
-
Jean-Baptiste v. Jean-Baptiste
...( id. [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Schwaber v. Schwaber, 91 A.D.3d 939, 939, 937 N.Y.S.2d 625 ; Conway v. Conway, 79 A.D.3d 965, 965–966, 912 N.Y.S.2d 700 ).Here, the Family Court properly denied the father's objections to the Support Magistrate's order. As an initial matter, alt......