IN RE: Gretchen OWENS (1997)

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals from so much of an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Dunn, J.), entered October 8, 1996, as granted the father's objections to so much of an order of the same court (Rodriguez, H.E.), entered June 18, 1996, as, after a hearing, increased his monthly child support obligation to $1,523.00.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

 When one parent seeks to increase the support obligations of the other parent based upon increased needs, it is not necessary to show an unanticipated and unreasonable change in circumstances, because the increase is predicated on the children's right to receive adequate support (see, Matter of Michaels v. Michaels, 56 N.Y.2d 924, 926, 453 N.Y.S.2d 605, 439 N.E.2d 321;  Matter of Brescia v. Fitts, 56 N.Y.2d 132, 451 N.Y.S.2d 68, 436 N.E.2d 518;  Haimowitz v. Gerber, 153 A.D.2d 879, 545 N.Y.S.2d 599).   However, the increased support is warranted only where the movant sets forth specific increased expenses on behalf of the child as opposed to merely a general claim that the children's needs have increased as the child matured or as a result of inflation (see, Matter of Hogan v. Eriksen, 228 A.D.2d 505, 643 N.Y.S.2d 685;  Matter of Halliday v. Taddeo, 223 A.D.2d 542, 636 N.Y.S.2d 127;   Matter of Staffanell v. Staffanell, 220 A.D.2d 751, 633 N.Y.S.2d 74;   Rocchio v. Rocchio, 213 A.D.2d 535, 623 N.Y.S.2d 917;  Matter of Adams-Eppes v. Fulton, 195 A.D.2d 455, 600 N.Y.S.2d 140;  Zucker v. Zucker, 187 A.D.2d 507, 509, 589 N.Y.S.2d 908).

Here, the Family Court properly found that the mother failed to satisfy her burden of proving specific increased needs of the parties' children which warrant an increase in child support (see, Matter of Staffanell v. Staffanell, supra;  Matter of Adams-Eppes v. Fulton, supra;  Zucker v. Zucker, supra).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.