Opinion
07-26-2024
In the Matter of Mindy M. FALLIN, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Faisel A. HARUNA, Respondent-Appellant
ROSCETTI & DECASTRO, P.C., NIAGARA FALLS (CAMILLE S. BROWN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTAPPELLANT.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Mary G. Carney, J.), entered March 1, 2023, in a proceeding pursuant to. Family Court Act article 4. The order denied respondent’s objections to an order of the Support Magistrate.
ROSCETTI & DECASTRO, P.C., NIAGARA FALLS (CAMILLE S. BROWN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTAPPELLANT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., LINDLEY, DELCONTE, KEANE, AND HANNAH, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, respondent father appeals from an order denying his objections to the order of the Support Magistrate, which directed the father to pay petitioner mother child support in the amount of $1,737 per month. On appeal, the father contends that the Support Magistrate erred in imputing income to him in the amount of $100,000 for the purpose of determining his child support obligation. We affirm.
[1–5] Courts have "‘considerable discretion’ " to impute income to a parent in fashioning a child support award, and "a court’s imputation of income will not be disturbed so long as there is record support for its determination" (Lauzonis v. Lauzonis, 105 AD.3d 1351, 1351, 964 N.Y.S.2d 796 [4th Dept. 2013]; see Matter of Muok v. Muok, 138 A.D.3d 1458, 1459, 30 N.Y.S.3d 776 [4th Dept. 2016]). "[T]he general rule is that child support is determined by the parents’ ability to provide for their child rather than their current economic situation" (Irene v. Irene [Appeal No. 2], 41 A.D.3d 1179, 1180, 837 N.Y.S.2d 797 [4th Dept. 2007] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Bashir v. Brunner, 169 A.D.3d 1382, 1383, 93 N.Y.S.3d 481 [4th Dept. 2019]). "[I]n determining a party’s child support obligation, a court need not rely upon the party’s own account of his or her finances, but may impute income based upon the party’s past income or demonstrated earning potential" (Belkhir v. Amrane-Belkhir, 118 A.D.3d 1396, 1397, 988 N.Y.S.2d 746 [4th Dept. 2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Courts may impute income based on a party’s employment history, future earning capacity, educational background, or money received from friends and relatives (see Matter of Drake v. Drake, 185 A.D.3d 1382, 1383, 127 N.Y.S.3d 661 [4th Dept. 2020], lv denied 36 N.Y.3d 909, 2021 WL 1181658 [2021]; Matter of Deshotel v. Mandile, 151 A.D.3d 1811, 1812, 59 N.Y.S.3d 209 [4th Dept. 2017]; Matter of Rohme v. Burns, 92 A.D.3d 946, 947, 939 N.Y.S.2d 532 [2d Dept. 2012]). Further, "where a party’s account [of his or her own finances] is not believable, the court is justified in finding a true or potential income higher than that claimed" (Elsayed v. Edrees, 141 A.D.3d 503, 505, 35 N.Y.S.3d 411 [2d Dept. 2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 908, 2016 WL 6827049 [2016] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Sharlow v. Sharlow, 77 A.D.3d 1430, 1431, 908 N.Y.S.2d 287 [4th Dept. 2010]).
[6] We conclude that the court’s determination to impute $100,000 income to the father is supported by the evidence in the record, including evidence of the amounts that the father paid for household expenses, private school tuition, the mother’s use of a vehicle, and miscellaneous child care expenses, as well as evidence of his access to financial support from his family (see Matter of Houck v. Houck, 217 A.D.3d 1556, 1557, 192 N.Y.S.3d 368 [4th Dept. 2023], lv denied 40 N.Y.3d 906, 2023 WL 8010919 [2023]; Matter of Remsen v. Remsen, 198 A.D.3d 658, 660, 156 N.Y.S.3d 44 [2d Dept. 2021]; Rohme, 92 A.D.3d at 947, 939 N.Y.S.2d 532).