Diamond v. Diamond
| Decision Date | 05 October 1998 |
| Citation | 254 A.D.2d 288,678 N.Y.S.2d 127 |
| Parties | 1998 N.Y. Slip Op. 8514 In the Matter of Harvey DIAMOND, Appellant, v. Vicki DIAMOND, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Robert D. Arenstein, New York City, for appellant.
BRACKEN, J.P., THOMPSON, PIZZUTO and ALTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Tolbert, J.), dated August 22, 1997, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Mrsich, H.E.), dated March 27, 1997, which, after a hearing, (1) denied that branch of his petition which was for a downward modification of his maintenance payments to the respondent, his former wife, and (2) granted that branch of the petition which was to direct the former wife to pay child support to him only in the sum of $25 per month.
ORDERED that the order dated August 22, 1997, is modified by deleting the provision thereof which denied the petitioner's objections to that portion of the order dated March 27, 1997, which directed the former wife to pay $25 per month in child support, and substituting therefore a provision granting the petitioner's objections to that portion of the order dated March 27, 1997; as so modified, the order dated August 22, 1997, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Westchester County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith.
The petitioner father, the custodial parent of the parties' three children, filed a petition seeking to reduce the maintenance he paid to the respondent, his former wife, pursuant to the parties' divorce judgment. He also sought child support from the respondent. The respondent filed no financial disclosure as required by Family Court Act § 424-a and failed to appear for the hearing. The Hearing Examiner denied the petitioner's request for downward modification of his maintenance obligation and, upon concluding that the respondent had no income, ordered that she pay $25 per month in child support. The petitioner filed objections to the Hearing Examiner's order, alleging, inter alia, that the Hearing Examiner erred in concluding that the respondent had no income and in failing to impute income to her. The Family Court rejected the petitioner's objections, and we now modify that order.
The Hearing Examiner properly denied the petitioner's request for a downward modification of his maintenance obligations. Although the petitioner asserts that he left his job at which he earned $120,000 per year to open up a car wash, and his income was subsequently reduced to approximately $13,000 per year, a voluntary decision to reduce one's income is not a proper change of circumstances sufficient to warrant a reduction in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bustamante v. Donawa
... ... Goddard, 256 A.D.2d 545, 546, 682 N.Y.S.2d 423;Matter of Diamond v. Diamond, 254 A.D.2d 288, 289, 678 N.Y.S.2d 127;Matter of Prill v. Mandell, 237 A.D.2d 445, 446, 655 N.Y.S.2d 78). “While a parent is entitled to ... ...
-
McGrath v. McGrath
... ... account of his or her finances, but may impute income based upon the party's past income or demonstrated earning potential (see, Matter of Diamond v. Diamond, 254 A.D.2d 288, 678 N.Y.S.2d 127; Brown v. Brown, 239 A.D.2d 535, 657 N.Y.S.2d 764). Here, the court properly imputed an annual income ... ...
-
Mollon v. Mollon
... ... impute income based upon the party's past income or demonstrated earning potential" (McGrath v McGrath, 261 A.D.2d 369; see also, Matter of Diamond v Diamond, 254 A.D.2d 288; Matter of Zwick v Kulhan, 226 A.D.2d 734; Matter of Collins v Collins, 241 A.D.2d 725). Here, the Supreme Court considered ... ...
-
Matter of Crosby v. Hickey, 00-01209
...to reduce his or her income is not a change of circumstances warranting the reduction of a child support obligation (see, Matter of Diamond v Diamond, 254 A.D.2d 288). "Child support is determined by the parents' ability to provide for their child rather than their current economic situatio......