From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cherrez v. Lazo

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jan 16, 2013
102 A.D.3d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-01-16

In the Matter of Olga CHERREZ, respondent, v. José Antonio LAZO, appellant.


José Antonio Lazo, New Hyde Park, 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, Queens County (Arias, J.), dated September 8, 2011, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Blaustein, S.M.), dated April 29, 2011, which, after a hearing, dismissed his petition to modify a prior order of support.

ORDERED that the order dated September 8, 2011, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Family Court Act § 439(e) provides, in pertinent part, that “[s]pecific written objections to a final order of a support magistrate may be filed by either party with the [Family Court] within thirty days after receipt of the order in court or by personal service, or, if the objecting party or parties did not receive the order in court or by personal service, thirty-five days after mailing of the order to such party or parties.” An order of a Support Magistrate is final, and the Family Court's review of objections to such an order is the equivalent of appellate review ( see Matter of Renee XX. v. John ZZ., 51 A.D.3d 1090, 1092, 857 N.Y.S.2d 770;Matter of Musarra v. Musarra, 28 A.D.3d 668, 814 N.Y.S.2d 657;Matter of Redmond v. Easy, 18 A.D.3d 283, 794 N.Y.S.2d 643). As such, the party challenging the Support Magistrate's order is required to make specific objections in order to preserve such challenges ( seeFamily Ct. Act § 439[e]; Matter of Renee XX. v. John ZZ., 51 A.D.3d at 1092, 857 N.Y.S.2d 770;Matter of Musarra v. Musarra, 28 A.D.3d 668, 814 N.Y.S.2d 657).

Since the father's objections to the Support Magistrate's order were not specific within the meaning of Family Court Act § 439(e), the Family Court properly denied his objections on that ground ( see Family Ct. Act § 439[e]; Matter of White v. Knapp, 66 A.D.3d 1358, 1359, 886 N.Y.S.2d 527;Matter of Renee XX. v. John ZZ., 51 A.D.3d at 1092, 857 N.Y.S.2d 770;Matter of Musarra v. Musarra, 28 A.D.3d 668, 814 N.Y.S.2d 657;cf. Matter of Hodges v. Hodges, 40 A.D.3d 639, 833 N.Y.S.2d 396;Matter of Pedone v. Corpes, 24 A.D.3d 559, 807 N.Y.S.2d 107).

MASTRO, J.P., DICKERSON, LOTT and AUSTIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Cherrez v. Lazo

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jan 16, 2013
102 A.D.3d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

Cherrez v. Lazo

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Olga CHERREZ, respondent, v. José Antonio LAZO, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Jan 16, 2013

Citations

102 A.D.3d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
957 N.Y.S.2d 888
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 205

Citing Cases

Licitra v. Licitra

.’ An order of a Support Magistrate is final, and the Family Court's review of objections to such an order is…

Y.D. v. L.O.

The parties are permitted by statute to submit "specific written objection," to the order for "review" by a…