IN RE: Laura C. PENNINO (2008)

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Luft, J.), dated February 1, 2007, which denied her objections to (1) an order of the same court (Grier, S.M.), dated November 21, 2006, which, after a hearing, inter alia, fixed child support arrears against the father in the sum of only $1,400, and (2) an order of the same court (Grier, S.M.), also dated November 21, 2006, which, after the same hearing, directed her to pay child support in the amount of $2,400 per month.

ORDERED that the order dated February 1, 2007, is affirmed, with costs.

 Contrary to the mother's contention, the Support Magistrate properly credited the father for child support payments made to the mother on the basis of two checks, in the amounts of $10,000 and $11,000, respectively.   “Great deference should be given to the determination of the Support Magistrate, who is in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence proffered” (Matter of Strella v. Ferro, 42 A.D.3d 544, 545, 841 N.Y.S.2d 118).   As the record supports the determination, the Family Court properly denied the mother's objection on this basis (see Matter of Strella v. Ferro, 42 A.D.3d at 545, 841 N.Y.S.2d 118;  Matter of Kahl-Lapine v. Lapine, 35 A.D.3d 611, 612, 824 N.Y.S.2d 742;  Matter of Mahoney v. Goggins, 24 A.D.3d 668, 669, 807 N.Y.S.2d 125;  Matter of Penninipede v. Penninipede, 6 A.D.3d 445, 446-447, 775 N.Y.S.2d 329;  Matter of Saren v. Palma, 3 A.D.3d 572, 770 N.Y.S.2d 652).

 The Family Court also properly denied the mother's objections with respect to the Support Magistrate's determination as to her child support obligation.   In light of the mother's admission as to her annual expenses, the Support Magistrate properly imputed to her an annual income of $172,800 (see Matter of Strella v. Ferro, 42 A.D.3d at 545, 841 N.Y.S.2d 118;  DeVries v. DeVries, 35 A.D.3d 794, 795, 828 N.Y.S.2d 142;  Peri v. Peri, 2 A.D.3d 425, 426, 767 N.Y.S.2d 846;  Gleicher v. Gleicher, 303 A.D.2d 549, 550, 756 N.Y.S.2d 624).   Since the combined parental income exceeded $80,000, the Support Magistrate, in the exercise of his discretion, could apply either the statutory percentage or the factors set forth in Family Court Act § 413(1)(f), or both, to the parental income in excess of $80,000 (see Family Ct. Act § 413 [1][c][3];  Matter of Cassano v. Cassano, 85 N.Y.2d 649, 655, 628 N.Y.S.2d 10, 651 N.E.2d 878;  Matter of Strella v. Ferro, 42 A.D.3d at 546, 841 N.Y.S.2d 118).   Under the circumstances presented here, the Family Court correctly concluded that the Support Magistrate providently exercised his discretion in computing child support by applying the statutory percentage to the combined parental income over $80,000 (see Matter of Strella v. Ferro, 42 A.D.3d at 546, 841 N.Y.S.2d 118;  Matter of Lachman v. LeJemtel, 19 A.D.3d 421, 421-422, 796 N.Y.S.2d 143;  Matter of Lava v. Damianou, 10 A.D.3d 420, 421, 780 N.Y.S.2d 789;  Bains v. Bains, 308 A.D.2d 557, 559, 764 N.Y.S.2d 721;  Zaremba v. Zaremba, 237 A.D.2d 351, 352-353, 654 N.Y.S.2d 176) and sufficiently set forth his reasons for doing so (see Matter of Strella v. Ferro, 42 A.D.3d at 546, 841 N.Y.S.2d 118).