From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Ahrem v. Cattell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 13, 1998
254 A.D.2d 352 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

October 13, 1998

Appeal from the Family Court, Suffolk County (Trainor, J.).


Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A prima facie case of willful violation was established by the proof that the father had not paid court ordered child support ( see, Family Ct Act § 454 [a]). At that point, the burden of proving inability to pay shifted to the father ( see, Matter of Powers v. Powers, 86 N.Y.2d 63). We decline to disturb the finding of the Hearing Examiner and the Family Court that the father's testimony concerning his inability to work due to physical disability was not credible ( see, Matter of Liccione v. John H., 65 N.Y.2d 826).

Contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court could rely upon the findings of the Hearing Examiner, without holding a new hearing, in making its determination that the father should be incarcerated for willful violation of the child support order ( see, Matter of Mazzilli v. Mazzilli, 248 A.D.2d 474; see, Matter of Louie v. Ong, 211 A.D.2d 495). Furthermore, based upon the evidence of child support arrears in the amount of $7,150, we reject the father's contention that the $7,000 he was required to pay in order to purge the contempt was unconscionable.

Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Altman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Ahrem v. Cattell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 13, 1998
254 A.D.2d 352 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Matter of Ahrem v. Cattell

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of DEBORAH AHREM, Respondent, v. RICHARD CATTELL, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 13, 1998

Citations

254 A.D.2d 352 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
678 N.Y.S.2d 296

Citing Cases

Matter of Modica v. Thompson

There was no proof as to the necessity for placing certain debts ahead of his support obligation. The proof…

Matter of Makawi v. Makawi

"[P]roof that [the appellant] has failed to pay support as ordered alone establishes [the] petitioner's…