Opinion
13046 Dkt. No. F-3571-99/18J Case No. 2020-00157
02-04-2021
In the Matter of MARY H., Petitioner–Respondent, v. CEDRIC R., Respondent–Appellant.
Law Office of Lewis S. Calderon, Jamaica (Lewis S. Calderon of counsel), for appellant. Law Offices of Salihah R. Denman, PLLC, New York (Salihah R. Denman of counsel), for respondent.
Law Office of Lewis S. Calderon, Jamaica (Lewis S. Calderon of counsel), for appellant.
Law Offices of Salihah R. Denman, PLLC, New York (Salihah R. Denman of counsel), for respondent.
Manzanet–Daniels, J.P., Singh, Kennedy, Mendez, JJ.
Appeal from order, Family Court, Bronx County (Phaedra F. Perry, J.), entered on or about November 14, 2019, which confirmed the Support Magistrate's finding of a willful violation of an order of support and committed respondent father to the custody of the New York City Department of Corrections and set the purge amount at $10,000, unanimously dismissed, without costs.
The appeal from that portion of the order committing the father to the custody of the Department of Corrections for a period of six months unless he paid the purge amount is dismissed as academic since the period of incarceration has expired (see Matter of Elizabeth L. v. Kevin O., 179 A.D.3d 404, 405, 117 N.Y.S.3d 182 [1st Dept. 2020] ). Moreover, the appeal from that portion of the order finding a willful violation is dismissed, inasmuch as the Support Magistrate's finding was made upon the father's default, and the father did not move to vacate such default (see id. ).
In any event, viewed in totality, the record does not support a finding that the father's attorney failed to provide meaningful representation and that such representation resulted in actual prejudice to the father (see Matter of Asia Sabrina N. [Olu N.], 117 A.D.3d 543, 544, 985 N.Y.S.2d 560 [1st Dept. 2014] ). The father testified that he was not completely disabled and obtained two jobs since his injury. This fact was confirmed by a letter from his doctor. Furthermore, the father made a deliberate decision to depress his pension income for four years to pursue a social security disability income claim. He also testified that he did not entertain the notion to forego the disability case in order to collect the full amount of his pension and pay child support. In light of the foregoing, the father failed to establish how a lack of medical testimony or additional social security disability records resulted in actual prejudice to him.