From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lanasa v. Lanasa

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 1, 2012
95 A.D.3d 890 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-05-1

In the Matter of Claudette E. LANASA, appellant, v. Louis M. LANASA, respondent.


Joseph C. Stroble, Sayville, N.Y., for appellant.

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Cheng, J.), dated June 8, 2011, which denied her objections to so much of an order of the same court (Grier, S.M.), dated February 8, 2011, as granted the father's petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation so as to reduce his child support obligation to the sum of $452 per month.

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

*890 In an order dated February 8, 2011, a Support Magistrate, inter alia, granted the father's petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation based on the fact that one of the subject children was now residing with the father, and recalculated the father's child support obligation pursuant to the Child Support Standards Act guidelines ( see Domestic Relations Law § 240[1–b] ). In an order dated June 8, 2011, the Family Court denied the mother's objections to that portion of the Support Magistrate's order.

The Family Court properly denied the mother's objections to the Support Magistrate's order. Contrary to the mother's contention, the Support Magistrate providently exercised its discretion in imputing income to her based on her earning capacity ( see Matter of Tosques v. Ponyicky, 89 A.D.3d 1097, 1098, 933 N.Y.S.2d 579; Matter of Rohme v. Burns, 79 A.D.3d 756, 757, 912 N.Y.S.2d 652; Matter of Azrak v. Azrak, 60 A.D.3d 937, 938, 876 N.Y.S.2d 439).

The mother's remaining contention is not properly before this Court, as it was not raised in her objections to the Support Magistrate's order ( see Matter of Tosques v. Ponyicky, 89 A.D.3d at 1098, 933 N.Y.S.2d 579; Matter of Feng Lucy Luo v. Yang, 89 A.D.3d 946, 947, 933 N.Y.S.2d 80, lv. denied 18 N.Y.3d 809, 2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 68313, 2012 WL 996894 [2012]; Matter of Hicks v. Hicks, 87 A.D.3d 1143, 929 N.Y.S.2d 875).

RIVERA, J.P., HALL, LOTT and AUSTIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lanasa v. Lanasa

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 1, 2012
95 A.D.3d 890 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

Lanasa v. Lanasa

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Claudette E. LANASA, appellant, v. Louis M. LANASA…

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

Date published: May 1, 2012

Citations

95 A.D.3d 890 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 3450
942 N.Y.S.2d 889

Citing Cases

Bustamante v. Donawa

Under the circumstances of this case, it was appropriate to impute income where, as here, the father…