Summary
In Ferraro v. Nash, 293 AD2d 538, 739 N.Y.S.2d 838(2nd Dept. 2002), the Appellate Division determined that New York had jurisdiction to issue a new child support order on behalf of a child who was less than 21 years of age after the original Florida child support order had expired.
Summary of this case from In Matter of Schottenstein v. SchottensteinOpinion
2001-01070
Submitted March 18, 2002.
April 8, 2002.
In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Lubow, J.), dated December 14, 2000, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Blaustein, H.E.), dated July 19, 2000, which, after a hearing, directed that he pay child support in the amount of $553 per month.
Robert Nash, Deltona, Fl., appellant pro se.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Pamela Seider Dolgow and Linda H. Young of counsel), for respondent.
Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Since the child support order that was entered in Florida expired, and the child was less than 21 years of age as of the date of the Hearing Examiner's order (see Family Court Act § 413[a]), the Family Court had the power to issue a new child support order in the instant proceeding (see Matter of Hauger v. Hauger, 256 A.D.2d 1076, 1077; Matter of Goodison v. Goodison, 184 Misc.2d 573).
The record supports the Hearing Examiner's determination that the child did not abandon the parental relationship with the appellant (see Matter of Villota v. Zelenak, 203 A.D.2d 370, 371). Under the circumstances, the child support award was a provident exercise of the Family Court's discretion (see Matter of Palmieri v. La Conti, 242 A.D.2d 537; Matter of Picciullo v. Collein, 226 A.D.2d 643).
ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.