Martin v. Cooper
Decision Date | 13 June 2012 |
Citation | 947 N.Y.S.2d 526,2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 04752,96 A.D.3d 849 |
Parties | In the Matter of Andrea MARTIN, respondent, v. Ronald COOPER, appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Ronald Cooper, appellant, v. Andrea Martin, respondent. (Proceeding No. 2). |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
96 A.D.3d 849
947 N.Y.S.2d 526
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 04752
In the Matter of Andrea MARTIN, respondent,
v.
Ronald COOPER, appellant. (Proceeding No. 1)
In the Matter of Ronald Cooper, appellant,
v.
Andrea Martin, respondent. (Proceeding No. 2).
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
June 13, 2012.
[947 N.Y.S.2d 527]
Linda C. Braunsberg, Staten Island, N.Y., for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Pamela Seider Dolgow, Dona B. Morris, and Jodi H. Lev of counsel), for respondent.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, PLUMMER E. LOTT, and SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.
[96 A.D.3d 849]In related child support proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals (1) from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County (Wolff, J.), dated May 18, 2011, which denied his objections to two orders of the same court (Hickey, S.M.), dated February 24, 2011, and February 25, 2011, respectively, denying, after a hearing, his motion to vacate an order of child support of the same court dated September 13, 2007, made upon his default in appearing, denying his petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation, denying his motion to retroactively cap the amount of the child support arrears due at $500, and determining that he willfully violated the order of child support, and (2) from an order of commitment of the same court dated May 19, 2011, which confirmed the finding of willfulness and directed that he be incarcerated for a term of three months on consecutive weekends, Fridays (7:00 P.M.) until Sunday (7:00 P.M.), or until he pays to the mother or posts the sum of $7,500.
ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order of commitment as directed that the father be incarcerated is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, as the period of incarceration has expired ( see Matter of Larrier v. Williams, 84 A.D.3d 805, 806, 924 N.Y.S.2d 272); and it is further,
ORDERED that the order dated May 18, 2011, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order of commitment is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
The Family Court's denial of the father's objection to the Support Magistrate's finding of willfulness and her recommendation of a term of incarceration was proper since the Support Magistrate's recommendation had no force and effect until [96 A.D.3d 850]confirmed by the Family Court Judge ( seeFamily Ct. Act § 439[e];...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gioia v. Gioia
...(see Family Ct Act § 454[3][a] ; Matter of Ribeiro v. Honorio, 190 A.D.3d 977, 978, 136 N.Y.S.3d 779 ; Matter of Martin v. Cooper, 96 A.D.3d 849, 851, 947 N.Y.S.2d 526 ). This prima facie showing shifts the burden to the parent obligor to come forward with competent, credible evidence of hi......
- Grace v. Amabile
-
Orange Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. ex rel. Misty F.-R. v. Germel Y.
...both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a potentially meritorious defense ( see Matter of Martin v. Cooper, 96 A.D.3d 849, 850, 947 N.Y.S.2d 526;Matter of Proctor–Shields v. Shields, 74 A.D.3d 1347, 1348, 904 N.Y.S.2d 183). Contrary to the appellant's contention, his c......
-
Addimando v. Huerta
...violated the support order (see Matter of Ortiz–Schwoerer v. Schwoerer, 128 A.D.3d 828, 830, 9 N.Y.S.3d 117 ; Matter of Martin v. Cooper, 96 A.D.3d 849, 850, 947 N.Y.S.2d 526 ). To challenge the determination that he wilfully violated a support order, the father's sole remedy was to await t......