Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: VALERIE Q., Petitioner-Respondent, v. ARTURO H., Respondent-Appellant.
Respondent father appeals from an order finding him in willful violation of a prior child support order, committing him to a term of incarceration of six months in jail, and suspending the sentence of incarceration upon payment of $7,412.33 to the child support enforcement unit. Petitioner mother's submission of a certified calculation of all child support provided by the father constituted prima facie evidence of the father's failure to pay the child support required by the prior order (see Matter of Moore v. Blank, 8 A.D.3d 1090, 778 N.Y.S.2d 370, lv. denied 3 N.Y.3d 606, 785 N.Y.S.2d 22, 818 N.E.2d 664; see also Family Ct. Act § 454[3][a]; Matter of Powers v. Powers, 86 N.Y.2d 63, 68-69, 629 N.Y.S.2d 984, 653 N.E.2d 1154). We note that, although the father initially testified at the hearing before the Support Magistrate that he was unemployed during the period in which he failed to pay child support, he subsequently admitted at the hearing before Family Court that he had continued to work part-time during that period but failed to make child support payments. We therefore conclude that the father failed to meet his burden of producing “competent, credible evidence of his inability to make the required payments” (see Powers, 86 N.Y.2d at 70, 629 N.Y.S.2d 984, 653 N.E.2d 1154; Matter of Fogg v. Stoll, 26 A.D.3d 810, 809 N.Y.S.2d 368).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: February 01, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)