Opinion
2016–10310 Index No. 16032/09
10-16-2019
Chandra RAMDAS, Respondent, v. Siarie RAMDAS, Appellant.
Edwin T. Mulhern, Garden City, NY, for appellant. Erica B. Sakol, Mineola, N.Y. (Matthew A. Weiss of counsel), for respondent.
Edwin T. Mulhern, Garden City, NY, for appellant.
Erica B. Sakol, Mineola, N.Y. (Matthew A. Weiss of counsel), for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., HECTOR D. LASALLE, BETSY BARROS, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals from a judgment of divorce of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Pam Jackman Brown, J.), entered August 19, 2016. The judgment of divorce, upon a decision of the same court dated July 21, 2015, made after a nonjury trial, inter alia, directed the defendant to pay child support in the sum of $771.40 per month for the parties' two unemancipated children and awarded the plaintiff an attorney's fee in the sum of $18,000.
ORDERED that the judgment of divorce is affirmed, with costs. In 2009, the plaintiff commenced this action against the defendant for a divorce and ancillary relief. Following a nonjury trial, the Supreme Court, inter alia, directed the defendant to pay child support in the sum of $771.40 per month for the parties' two unemancipated children and awarded the plaintiff an attorney's fee in the sum of $18,000. The defendant appeals.
We agree with the Supreme Court's determination to deny the defendant's request, made on the first day of trial, for an adjournment to retain new counsel (see Matter of Wiley v. Musabyemariya , 118 A.D.3d 898, 901, 988 N.Y.S.2d 259 ; Matter of Arc on 4th St. Inc. v. Quesada , 112 A.D.3d 431, 431, 976 N.Y.S.2d 70 ; Barnaby v. Barnaby , 259 A.D.2d 870, 871, 686 N.Y.S.2d 230 ).
Moreover, the record supports the Supreme Court's imputation of income to the defendant. In determining a parent's child support obligation, a court need not rely upon the parent's own account of his or her finances, but may impute income based upon the parent's past income or demonstrated earning potential (see Matter of Weissbach v. Weissbach , 169 A.D.3d 702, 703 ; Matter of Rohme v. Burns , 92 A.D.3d 946, 947, 939 N.Y.S.2d 532 ; DeSouza–Brown v. Brown , 71 A.D.3d 946, 947, 897 N.Y.S.2d 228 ; Rosenberg v. Rosenberg , 44 A.D.3d 1022, 1025, 845 N.Y.S.2d 371 ; Matter of Strella v. Ferro , 42 A.D.3d 544, 546, 841 N.Y.S.2d 118 ). The court may impute income based on the parent's employment history, future earning capacity, educational background, or money received from friends and relatives (see Matter of Rohme v. Burns , 92 A.D.3d at 947, 939 N.Y.S.2d 532 ; Matter of Bouie v. Joseph , 91 A.D.3d 641, 642, 936 N.Y.S.2d 276 ). Here, the court's imputation of income was supported by the evidence presented, including, inter alia, the defendant's educational background and experience.
Upon considering the equities and circumstances of this case, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination awarding the plaintiff an attorney's fee in the sum of $18,000 (see Domestic Relations Law § 237[a] ; O'Shea v. O'Shea , 93 N.Y.2d 187, 193–194, 689 N.Y.S.2d 8, 711 N.E.2d 193 ; DeCabrera v. Cabrera–Rosete , 70 N.Y.2d 879, 881–882, 524 N.Y.S.2d 176, 518 N.E.2d 1168 ).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
RIVERA, J.P., LASALLE, BARROS and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.