WADLOW v. WADLOW (2006)

 Family Court properly denied the objections of respondent to the order of the Support Magistrate that continued in full force and effect a prior order entered upon respondent's default.   That prior order granted the petition seeking an upward modification of respondent's child support obligation.   The record supports the Support Magistrate's conclusion that the failure of respondent to receive notice of the proceeding was the result of his decision “to ignore notice of certified mail and leave such mail unclaimed at the post office,” and thus his default is not excusable (Rifenburg v. Liffiton Homes, 107 A.D.2d 1015, 1016, 486 N.Y.S.2d 529;  see Paul Conte Cadillac v. C.A.R.S. Purch. Serv., 126 A.D.2d 621, 622, 511 N.Y.S.2d 58;  Cascione v. Acme Equip. Corp., 23 A.D.2d 49, 50, 258 N.Y.S.2d 234).   Respondent did not timely challenge the order entered upon his default based upon lack of personal jurisdiction (see Electric Ins. Co. v. Grajower, 256 A.D.2d 833, 834-835, 681 N.Y.S.2d 667, lv. dismissed 93 N.Y.2d 848, 688 N.Y.S.2d 495, 710 N.E.2d 1094), and thus the court properly rejected his objection based upon lack of personal jurisdiction (see Matter of Wideman v. Murley, 155 A.D.2d 841, 842, 548 N.Y.S.2d 102;  Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v. Paulino F., 146 Misc.2d 1014, 1015, 553 N.Y.S.2d 636).

It is hereby ORDERED that the amended order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM: