Opinion
2003-08680.
Decided April 19, 2004.
In two related support proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Sammarco, J.), dated August 8, 2003, which denied his objections to an amended order of the same court (Winslow, H.E.) dated June 10, 2003, dismissing his cross petition for child support.
Larkin, Axelrod, Trachte Tetenbaum, LLP, Newburgh, N.Y. (Azra J. Khan of counsel), for appellant.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the objections are sustained, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Dutchess County, for further proceedings consistent herewith, and the order dated June 10, 2003 is vacated.
Upon the prior decision and order of this court dated March 24, 2003, a support order of the Family Court, Dutchess County, dated November 7, 2001, in this case was vacated, and the matter was remitted to that court for a new hearing ( see Matter of Greco v. Zuidema, 303 A.D.2d 680). Instead, the Family Court, on its own motion, dismissed the petitions and, in effect, directed that the November 7, 2001, order be "registered for modification in the state where the [mother] resides."
The Family Court had no authority, in effect, to direct that the support order, which this court had reversed on appeal, be registered in another state ( see Campbell v. Campbell, 302 A.D.2d 345; Maracina v. Schirrmeister, 152 A.D.2d 502; Matter of Jennifer G., 110 A.D.2d 801; see also United States v. Pink, 36 N.Y.S.2d 961; City of New York v. Scott, 178 Misc.2d 836). Furthermore, we cannot determine from this record whether there is presently a basis for jurisdiction over this matter in Dutchess County. Accordingly, the matter must be remitted to the Family Court, Dutchess County, to determine whether jurisdiction exists ( see Family Ct Act § 580-205[a][1]). If so, the Family Court should hold the hearing as directed by this court in its prior order ( see Matter of Greco v. Zuidema, supra).
SANTUCCI, J.P., FLORIO, SCHMIDT and RIVERA, JJ., concur.