From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Levy v. Levy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 24, 1993
193 A.D.2d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

May 24, 1993

Appeal from the Family Court, Nassau County (DeMaro, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, the father's objections to the order of the Hearing Examiner are sustained, the order of the Hearing Examiner is vacated, and the petition for an upward modification of child support is dismissed.

The parties entered into a settlement agreement in February 1988 which obligated the father to pay child support in the amount of $75 per week per child for a total of $225 per week for the parties' three children. The agreement also provided that the parties were to share equally any of the children's unreimbursed medical and dental expenses. In April 1990 the mother brought a proceeding for an upward modification of child support, based on the children's increased needs and the father's increase in salary. The mother was required to demonstrate an unanticipated and unreasonable change in circumstances or that the agreement was unfair when entered into (see, Matter of Boden v Boden, 42 N.Y.2d 210) or that her income and the original child support award were insufficient to meet the children's present needs (see, Matter of Brescia v Fitts, 56 N.Y.2d 132; see also, Matter of Bernstein v Goldman, 180 A.D.2d 735).

We find that the mother failed to meet her burden. No allegation is made that the settlement agreement was unfair, nor that the increased needs of the children were unanticipated and unreasonable (see, Matter of Murrin v Murrin, 186 A.D.2d 567; Matter of Bernstein v Goldman, supra; May May Cheng v McManus, 178 A.D.2d 906). Although the father's income had increased since 1988, the mother's income had increased as well. The record establishes that the mother's income, together with the original child support award, were sufficient to meet the children's increased needs (see, Matter of Bernstein v Goldman, supra; May May Cheng v McManus, supra; cf., Matter of Berg v O'Leary, 193 A.D.2d 732). Accordingly, the Family Court erred in modifying the child support provision in the parties' agreement and in readjusting the parties' respective obligations to pay for the children's unreimbursed medical and dental expenses. Bracken, J.P., O'Brien, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Levy v. Levy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 24, 1993
193 A.D.2d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Matter of Levy v. Levy

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JUDITH B. LEVY, Respondent, v. GREGORY LEVY, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 24, 1993

Citations

193 A.D.2d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
598 N.Y.S.2d 279

Citing Cases

Swerdlow v. Swerdlow

She seeks a modification of the 1992 judgment citing "a substantial change in financial circumstances of both…

Matter of Sorrentino v. Sorrentino

In the circumstances of this case, the increase in respondent's income is a factor to be considered, along…