Opinion
2014-08394 (Docket No. F-4205-05)
06-24-2015
In the Matter of Johnine K. VanBEERS, respondent, v. William VanBEERS, appellant.
Hirshfeld & Hirshfeld, New City, N.Y. (William A. Hirshfeld of counsel) for appellant. Alysia R. Baker, Goshen, N.Y., for respondent.
Hirshfeld & Hirshfeld, New City, N.Y. (William A. Hirshfeld of counsel) for appellant.
Alysia R. Baker, Goshen, N.Y., for respondent.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, JEFFREY A. COHEN, and COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.
Opinion
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Carol S. Klein, J.), entered July 29, 2014. The order denied the father's objections to an order of that court (Christine Patneaude Krahulik, S.M.), dated June 24, 2014, which, after a hearing, inter alia, awarded the mother certain child support arrears and calculated the father's share of the child's college expenses in accordance with the parties' dissolution agreement.
ORDERED that the order entered July 29, 2014, is affirmed, with costs.
The Family Court properly denied the father's objections to the Support Magistrate's order (see Matter of Mahoney v. Goggins, 24 A.D.3d 668, 669, 807 N.Y.S.2d 125 ). In reviewing a determination of the Family Court, great deference should be given to the determination of the Support Magistrate, who was in the best position to hear and evaluate the evidence, as well as the credibility of the witnesses (see Matter of Musarra v. Musarra, 28 A.D.3d 668, 669, 814 N.Y.S.2d 657 ). Contrary to the father's contentions, the Family Court properly determined, under the circumstances presented here, that the father was not relieved of his contractual obligation to contribute to the child's college expenses on the ground that the mother did not adequately discuss the matter with him, where the evidence demonstrated that the mother had made attempts to do so, and that the father failed to respond to those attempts (see Matter of Gretz v. Gretz, 109 A.D.3d 788, 971 N.Y.S.2d 312 ; Matter of Parker v. Parker, 74 A.D.3d 1076, 1077, 903 N.Y.S.2d 145 ; Matter of Heinlein v. Kuzemka, 49 A.D.3d 996, 998, 854 N.Y.S.2d 560 ).
The father's remaining contention is without merit.