Opinion
2012-12-19
In the Matter of Jill M. PAPENHAUSEN, respondent, v. Michael SUDBRINK, appellant.
Michael Sudbrink, Hicksville, N.Y., appellant pro se.
In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Hoffmann, J.), dated October 4, 2011, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Joseph–Cherry, S.M.) dated July 18, 2011, which, after a hearing, granted the mother's petition for an upward modification of his child support obligation.
ORDERED that the order dated October 4, 2011, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The substantial increase in the father's income, plus the mother's evidence of specific increased expenses, warranted an upward modification of the father's child support obligation ( see Matter of Ryan v. Levine, 80 A.D.3d 767, 916 N.Y.S.2d 780). The Support Magistrate properly calculated the father's child support obligation, using the income reported on his most recent tax return ( see Domestic Relations Law § 240[1–b][b][5]; Hughes v. Hughes, 79 A.D.3d 473, 475, 912 N.Y.S.2d 206; Matter of Krukenkamp v. Krukenkamp, 54 A.D.3d 345, 346, 862 N.Y.S.2d 571). The father's remaining contentions are without merit.
Accordingly, the Family Court properly denied the father's objections to the Support Magistrate's order.