From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Julie v. Adam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 22, 1995
222 A.D.2d 1012 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

December 22, 1995

Appeal from the Erie County Family Court, Szczur, J.

Present — Pine, J.P., Fallon, Wesley, Balio and Boehm, JJ.


Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs and matter remitted to Erie County Family Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: This appeal from a final order of support brings up for review the order of filiation (see, CPLR 5501 [a]; Family Ct Act § 1118; Matter of Deborah A.D. v David E.C., 217 A.D.2d 1005). The record supports the determination of Family Court that petitioner met her burden of proving respondent's paternity by clear and convincing evidence (see, Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. [Patricia A.] v Philip De G., 59 N.Y.2d 137, 141-142). The testimony of petitioner that she had sexual relations with respondent, and no one else, in December 1991, as well as the results of a blood test indicating a 99.63% probability that respondent is the child's father, provide clear and convincing evidence of respondent's paternity (see, Matter of Deborah A D v David E.C., supra; Matter of Niagara County Dept. of Social Servs. [Kimmie W.] v Randy M., 206 A.D.2d 878, 878-879).

Respondent does not argue on appeal that the court erred in requiring him to pay 50% of the child's uninsured health care expenses, and we, therefore, do not address that portion of the court's order (see, Ciesinski v Town of Aurora, 202 A.D.2d 984). The court erred, however, in directing respondent to pay child support in the amount of $25 per month. The Hearing Examiner's findings of fact establish that the amount was improperly based upon the minimum requirement of the Child Support Standards Act (CSSA) rather than upon application of the CSSA guidelines to respondent's income (see, Matter of Rose v Moody, 83 N.Y.2d 65, cert denied sub nom. Attorney Gen. of N.Y. v Moody, ___ US ___, 114 S Ct 1837; Matter of Deborah A.D. v David E.C., supra). The record is inadequate for us to determine the appropriate level of child support that respondent should pay. Therefore, we remit the matter to Erie County Family Court for a hearing to determine the appropriate level of child support (see, Matter of Deborah A D v David E.C., supra; Matter of Reaves v Abdullah [appeal No. 2], 197 A.D.2d 911).


Summaries of

Matter of Julie v. Adam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 22, 1995
222 A.D.2d 1012 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Matter of Julie v. Adam

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JULIE W., Respondent, v. ADAM S., Appellant. (Appeal No…

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

Date published: Dec 22, 1995

Citations

222 A.D.2d 1012 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
636 N.Y.S.2d 526

Citing Cases

Matter of Ontario Co. D.S.S. v. Kenneth L

The court's determination of paternity is supported by clear and convincing evidence. The testimony that…