Opinion
May 26, 1998
Appeal from the Family Court, Suffolk County (Dounias, J.)
Ordered that the order is reversed, "on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, the fathers objections to the order of the Hearing Examiner are sustained, the order of the Hearing Examiner is vacated, and the petition for an upward modification of child support is dismissed.
We agree with the fathers contention that the mother adduced insufficient evidence to justify the upward modification of child support ordered by the Family Court. The mother does not dispute that the parties separation agreement, which contained a child support provision, was fair and equitable when entered into, and she has failed to show that an unanticipated and unreasonable change in circumstances has occurred or that the childs right to receive adequate support is not being met ( see, Merl v. Merl, 67 N.Y.2d 359; Matter of Brescia v. Fitts, 56 N.Y.2d 132; Matter of Boden v. Boden, 42 N.Y.2d 210). Neither the increased income of a noncustodial parent nor a generalized claim that the childs needs have increased as the child matures warrant an upward modification ( see, Matter of Lunman v. Lomanto, 239 A.D.2d 770; Rich v. Rich, 234 A.D.2d 354; Matter of Strack v. "Strack, 225 A.D.2d 872).
Bracken, J.P., Copertino, Joy and McGinity, JJ., concur.