IN RE: NATASHA M. (2019)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

IN RE: NATASHA M., Petitioner–Appellant, v. JAMES H., Respondent–Respondent.

8363

Decided: February 07, 2019

Sweeny, J.P., Tom, Webber, Kahn, Kern, JJ.

Carol L. Kahn, New York, for appellant. Kenneth M. Tuccillo, Hastings on Hudson, for respondent.

Petitioner failed to establish that respondent willfully violated the order of child support (see Matter of Powers v. Powers, 86 N.Y.2d 63, 69, 629 N.Y.S.2d 984, 653 N.E.2d 1154 [1995]; Family Ct. Act § 454). The evidence, which included the New York City Office of Child Support Enforcement Account Statement, showed that respondent made all the payments as ordered, and that his payments actually exceeded the required monthly child support payments. Contrary to petitioner's argument that respondent willfully violated the order because he made no additional payments towards the accrued arrears, the order of support did not direct respondent to pay an additional fixed amount towards the arrears.

We have considered petitioner's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

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.

Go To Learn About The Law