From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Furman v. Barnes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 4, 2002
293 A.D.2d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

88245

April 4, 2002.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Cortland County (Ames, J.), entered October 3, 2000, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, to modify a prior order of child support.

Robert Furman, Attica, pro se, and Jeffrey S. Berkun, Albany, for Robert Furman, appellant.

Before: Peters, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin, Rose and, Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


In January 1998, petitioner, the biological father of two children born in July 1988 and October 1989, was ordered by Family Court to pay child support. In June 2000, petitioner filed a petition seeking a downward modification of his child support obligation due to his loss of employment resulting from his arrest and incarceration. The Hearing Examiner, sua sponte, dismissed the petition without a hearing. Family Court denied petitioner's pro se objections to the Hearing Examiner's decision, finding that New York courts "presently do not consider long term incarceration to be a requisite change in circumstances such that would entitle a parent to modification of a support order". Family Court concluded that "there was no abuse of discretion on the part of the Hearing Examiner in denying the requested modification". Petitioner appeals.

Petitioner was sentenced on a criminal charge to a term of imprisonment of 4½ to 9 years.

Family Court's summary dismissal of petitioner's application for a downward modification of his child support obligation was not an abuse of discretion. Dismissal was entirely proper since petitioner's incarceration and loss of employment was occasioned solely by his wrongful conduct and resultant felony conviction (see, Matter of Knights v. Knights, 71 N.Y.2d 865, 867; Frasca v. Frasca, 213 A.D.2d 589, 590;Matter of Ontario County Dept. of Social Servs. [Powers] v. Jackson, 212 A.D.2d 1056).

Finally, we have examined and reject the arguments raised by petitioner in his pro se brief.

Peters, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Furman v. Barnes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 4, 2002
293 A.D.2d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Furman v. Barnes

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ROBERT FURMAN, Appellant, v. MARY BETH BARNES, Respondent

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

Date published: Apr 4, 2002

Citations

293 A.D.2d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
739 N.Y.S.2d 655

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Winn v. Baker

Respondent appeals from Family Court's denial of those objections. Family Court correctly denied respondent's…

In the Matter of J.A.E. v. A.B

In those instances, a support order was entered prior to the criminal sentence and incarceration of the…