IN RE: DEBORAH L. PALADINO

Reset A A Font size: Print

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

IN RE: DEBORAH L. PALADINO, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. FRANK P. PALADINO, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

CAF 10-01316

Decided: February 18, 2011

PRESENT:  CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, LINDLEY, GREEN, AND MARTOCHE, JJ. STEVEN C. BUITRON, SYRACUSE, FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT. ELISABETH A. BARKER, SYRACUSE, FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum:  Family Court properly granted respondent father's objection to the order of the Support Magistrate granting the petition seeking to modify a prior order of child support.   The father objected to the order insofar as it directed the Support Collection Unit to recompute the father's child support arrears by adding back in the amount for which the father was credited between the date that the parties' daughter began living with petitioner mother and the date the petition was filed.   As the court properly concluded, it “was only empowered to make its modification of the prior support order retroactive to the date of the filing of the ․ petition” (Matter of Aiken v. Aiken, 115 A.D.2d 919, 920;  see Family Ct Act § 449[2] ).   Further, “Family Court is a court of limited jurisdiction that cannot exercise powers beyond those granted to it by statute” (Matter of Johna M.S. v. Russell E.S., 10 NY3d 364, 366) or the State Constitution (see N.Y. Const, art VI, § 13).   The court therefore had no general equity jurisdiction and lacked authority to grant retroactive relief to the mother based upon equitable principles (see generally Matter of Brescia v Fitts, 56 N.Y.2d 132, 139).

Patricia L. Morgan

Clerk of the Court