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: MICHAEL D. GREEN, M.D., PETITIONER–APPELLANT, v. MONROE COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT UNIT, RESPONDENT–RESPONDENT. (APPEAL NO. 1.)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.
Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking, inter alia, to vacate respondent's determination denying his claim that respondent erred in calculating the amount of his child support arrears. Petitioner asserted, inter alia, that his ex-wife withdrew her request for a cost of living adjustment (COLA) to the amount of his child support obligation, and thus that respondent was precluded from making any such adjustment. In appeal No. 1, petitioner appeals from an order remitting the matter to Family Court for a hearing before the Support Magistrate on the merits of petitioner's objections to the COLA. In appeal No. 2, petitioner appeals from an “amended order” providing that prior orders of Family Court relative to the ex-wife's request for a COLA and petitioner's objections thereto “will not prevent an adjustment to petitioner's child support.” The “amended order” is in fact a supplemental order and therefore does not supersede the order in appeal No. 1 (see VanDusen v Fairport Sav. and Loan Assn., 147 A.D.2d 973, 973; cf. Allen v. Gen. Elec. Co., 32 AD3d 1163, 1165).
We conclude that both appeals must be dismissed. “An appeal from a nonfinal intermediate order in a CPLR article 78 proceeding does not lie as of right” (People ex rel. Afrika v. Russi, 204 A.D.2d 1062, 1062, appeal dismissed 84 N.Y.2d 821; see CPLR 5701[b][1] ), but “is authorized only upon permission of the Judge who made the order or from a Justice of the Appellate Division” (Afrika, 204 A.D.2d at 1063; see CPLR 5701[c] ). Although we have the discretion to treat the notices of appeal as applications for permission to appeal (see Matter of Laidlaw Energy & Envtl., Inc. v Town of Ellicottville, 60 AD3d 1284, 1284), we decline to do so under the circumstances of this case (see e.g. Matter of Scarcella v Village of Scarsdale Bd. of Trustees, 72 AD3d 831, 831, lv. denied 15 NY3d 715; Matter of Young Israel of Merrick v Board of Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 304 A.D.2d 834, 834–835; Afrika, 204 A.D.2d at 1063). In addition, we note that the appeal from the order in appeal No. 1 must be dismissed on the further ground that petitioner is not aggrieved by that order inasmuch as Supreme Court merely remitted the matter to Family Court for a hearing before the Support Magistrate on the merits of petitioner's objections to the COLA (see Matter of Byrne v. Byrne, 46 AD3d 811, 811). Finally, the issue raised in appeal No. 1 whether the court properly remitted the matter to Family Court is not encompassed by the notice of appeal therein (see generally Camperlino v. Town of Manlius Mun. Corp., 78 AD3d 1674, 1675, lv dismissed 17 NY3d 734).
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: CA 12–02369
Decided: November 15, 2013
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)