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: Maria L. GUEVARA, appellant, v. Gina UBILLUS, respondent.
In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Pessala, J.), dated December 8, 2004, which denied her objections to an order of the same court (Cahn, S.M.), dated August 24, 2006, which, after a hearing, denied her petition for child support.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
It is fundamental public policy in New York that parents of minor children are responsible for their children's support until age 21 (see Family Ct. Act § 413; Matter of Roe v. Doe, 29 N.Y.2d 188, 192-193, 324 N.Y.S.2d 71, 272 N.E.2d 567; Matter of Cellamare v. Lakeman, 36 A.D.3d 906, 829 N.Y.S.2d 588). “Nevertheless, children of employable age and in full possession of their faculties who voluntarily and without cause abandon their home, against the will of their parents and for the purpose of avoiding parental control, forfeit their right to demand support even if they are not financially self-sufficient” (Matter of Bailey v. Bailey, 15 A.D.3d 577, 790 N.Y.S.2d 215; see Matter of Roe v. Doe, 29 N.Y.2d 188, 192-193, 324 N.Y.S.2d 71, 272 N.E.2d 567; Matter of Alice C. v. Bernard G.C., 193 A.D.2d 97, 105, 602 N.Y.S.2d 623).
The evidence on the record sufficiently supports the finding that the petitioner, without good cause, abandoned the respondent's home on her eighteenth birthday in order to avoid parental control and to gain independence from her mother's restrictive household rules (see Matter of Roe v. Doe, 29 N.Y.2d 188, 324 N.Y.S.2d 71, 272 N.E.2d 567; Matter of Bailey v. Bailey, 15 A.D.3d 577, 790 N.Y.S.2d 215; Commr. of Social Servs. ex rel. Jones v. Jones-Gamble, 227 A.D.2d 618, 643 N.Y.S.2d 182; cf. Matter of Drago v. Drago, 138 A.D.2d 704, 706, 526 N.Y.S.2d 518). Accordingly, there is no basis to disturb the findings of the Support Magistrate, who was in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence offered, or the Family Court's ultimate conclusion that the petitioner abandoned the mother's home against the mother's will and without cause (see Matter of Bailey v. Bailey, 15 A.D.3d 577, 790 N.Y.S.2d 215).
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Decided: January 15, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)