From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rube v. Tornheim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 17, 2009
67 A.D.3d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

Nos. 2009-03071, F-6352-99.

November 17, 2009.

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Sacco, J.), dated February 17, 2009, which denied his objections to five orders of the same court (Fasone, S.M.), four dated March 20, 2008, and one dated June 20, 2008, which, after a hearing, inter alia, determined that he willfully violated a prior order of support, awarded the mother a money judgment for child support arrears in the principal sum of $35,464, and directed the entry of a judgment against him in the principal sum of $35,464.

Ernest H. Hammer, New York, N.Y., for appellant.

Amy Rube, Brooklyn, N.Y., respondent pro se.

Before: Rivera, J.P., Florio, Miller and Hall, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Great deference should be given to the determination of the Support Magistrate, who is in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses ( see Matter of Fragola v Alfaro, 45 AD3d 684, 685). Contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court properly determined that he willfully violated a prior order of support. Proof that the father failed to pay child support as ordered constituted prima facie evidence of the father's willful violation of the order of support and shifted the burden to him to come forward with competent, credible evidence of his inability to pay ( see Matter of Powers v Powers, 86 NY2d 63, 69-70; Matter of Brennan v Burger, 63 AD3d 922, 923; Matter of Greene-Tyus v Tyus, 61 AD3d 758). The father failed to rebut the prima facie evidence of willfulness because he presented no evidence that he was unable to pay child support ( see Matter of Musarra v Musarra, 28 AD3d 668, 669).

The father's remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

Rube v. Tornheim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 17, 2009
67 A.D.3d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

Rube v. Tornheim

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of AMY RUBE, Respondent, v. YEHUDA TORNHEIM, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 17, 2009

Citations

67 A.D.3d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 8625
888 N.Y.S.2d 420

Citing Cases

Withers v. Withers

Contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court correctly confirmed the finding of the Support…

Rabasco v. Lamar

There is a presumption that a parent has sufficient means to support his or her minor children ( seeFamily…