Opinion
2001-01494
Submitted March 12, 2002.
April 8, 2002.
In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Koenig, J.), dated December 12, 2000, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Bannon, H.E.), dated April 24, 2000, denying his application for a downward modification of his child support obligation.
Jeffrey Siegel, Hempstead, N.Y. (Frank J. Gulas, Jr., of counsel), for appellant.
Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the father's contention, his status as a recipient of public assistance is insufficient to relieve him of his obligation to provide court-ordered support (see Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v. McDonald, 245 A.D.2d 506; Matter of Ludwig v. Reyome, 195 A.D.2d 1020). Accordingly, the Family Court properly denied the father's motion for a downward modification of his child support obligation, as he failed to meet his burden of establishing a substantial change in circumstances (see Matter of Prisco v. Buxbaum, 275 A.D.2d 461; Matter of Roth v. Bowman, 237 A.D.2d 447; Klapper v. Klapper, 204 A.D.2d 518).
The father's remaining contentions are without merit.
RITTER, J.P., O'BRIEN, KRAUSMAN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.