IN RE: Joseph CAMARDA (2024)

DECISION & ORDER

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Alfred C. Graf, J.), dated April 24, 2023.  The order denied the father's objections to an order of the same court (Darlene Jorif–Mangane, S.M.) dated March 15, 2023, which, after a hearing, dismissed his petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation.

ORDERED that the order dated April 24, 2023, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court properly denied the father's objections to an order of a Support Magistrate, which, after a hearing, dismissed his petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation.  Contrary to the father's contention, he failed to demonstrate the existence of a substantial change in circumstances or that there had been an involuntary reduction in his income by 15% or more since his child support obligation was last modified (see Family Ct Act § 451[3];  Matter of Clarke v. Clarke, 193 AD3d 929).  Further, the Family Court has no discretion to reduce or cancel arrears which accrue prior to an application for a downward modification of a child support obligation (see Matter of Gardner v. Maddine, 112 AD3d 926, 927).

The father's remaining contentions are without merit.

IANNACCI, J.P., MALTESE, VOUTSINAS and VENTURA, JJ., concur.