Peterson v. Peterson
| Decision Date | 06 July 2010 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Kevin J. PETERSON, appellant, v. Terry PETERSON, respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
75 A.D.3d 512
In the Matter of Kevin J. PETERSON, appellant,
v.
Terry PETERSON, respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
July 6, 2010.
Kevin J. Peterson, Eastport, N.Y., appellant pro se.
Thomas K. Campagna, P.C., Ronkonkoma, N.Y. (Ettore Simeone of counsel), for respondent.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, ARIEL E. BELEN, and CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JJ.
In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Hoffmann, J.), dated September 18, 2009, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Buse, S.M.), dated July 23, 2009, which, after a hearing, in effect, denied his petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation and granted the mother's petition to enforce his child support obligations and for payment of unreimbursed medical expenses.
ORDERED that the order dated September 18, 2009, is affirmed, with costs.
"The child support provisions contained in a stipulation of settlement incorporated but not merged into a judgment of divorce should not be disturbed unless there has been a substantial and unanticipated change in circumstances since the entry of the judgment of divorce" ( Matter of Karagiannis v. Karagiannis, 73 A.D.3d 1064, 901 N.Y.S.2d 669; see Matter of Boden v. Boden, 42 N.Y.2d 210, 397 N.Y.S.2d 701, 366 N.E.2d 791; Beard v. Beard, 300 A.D.2d 268, 751 N.Y.S.2d 304). "In order to meet that burden, a party seeking a
downward modification based on a loss of employment must submit evidence demonstrating that he or she has diligently sought to obtain employment commensurate with that party's earning capacity" ( Matter of Gedacht v. Agulnek, 67 A.D.3d 1013, 1013, 890 N.Y.S.2d 76; see Matter of Muselevichus v. Muselevichus, 40 A.D.3d 997, 998-999, 836 N.Y.S.2d 661; Matter of Yepes v. Fichera, 230 A.D.2d 803, 646 N.Y.S.2d 533).Here, the unsubstantiated conclusory allegations of the father that he diligently sought employment commensurate with his qualifications and experience were insufficient to meet his burden ( see Matter of Gedacht v. Agulnek, 67 A.D.3d 1013, 890 N.Y.S.2d 76; Matter of Yepes v. Fichera, 230 A.D.2d 803, 646 N.Y.S.2d 533). Therefore, the Support Magistrate properly denied the father's petition for a downward modification of his support obligation ( see Matter of Muselevichus v. Muselevichus, 40...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
C.G. v. R.G.
...arrears. See Matter of Marra v. Hernandez, 102 A.D.3d 699, 956 N.Y.S.2d 908 (2d Dept.2013) ; See also, Matter of Peterson v. Peterson, 75 A.D.3d 512, 904 N.Y.S.2d 500 (2d Dept.2010). Husband's testimony that he only owes $131,000 under the terms of the Order, but that he made voluntary paym......
-
Rutuelo v. Rutuelo
...of having reimbursed the mother for any of the medical expenses for which she sought reimbursement ( see Matter of Peterson v. Peterson, 75 A.D.3d 512, 513, 904 N.Y.S.2d 500;Matter of Palmer v. Palmer, 71 A.D.3d 1152, 898 N.Y.S.2d 192;Matter of Kahl–Lapine v. Lapine, 35 A.D.3d at 612, 824 N......
- In the Matter of Sing W.C. (anonymous).Sing Y.C. (anonymous)
-
Rolko v. Intini
...with his qualifications and experience (see Matter of Riendeau v. Riendeau, 95 A.D.3d at 892, 943 N.Y.S.2d 215 ; Peterson v. Peterson, 75 A.D.3d 512, 513, 904 N.Y.S.2d 500 ; Matter of Gedacht v. Agulnek, 67 A.D.3d 1013, 1013, 890 N.Y.S.2d 76 ). Thus, the Family Court properly denied the fat......