From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Hamlin v. Kirnan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 7, 1992
186 A.D.2d 1038 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

October 7, 1992

Appeal from the Onondaga County Family Court, Rossi, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Balio, Lawton, Fallon and Davis, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Respondent appeals from a Family Court order which denied his objections to the Decision and Order of a Hearing Examiner granting petitioner's application for an upward modification in child support. The Hearing Examiner's determination that respondent, a licensed real estate broker, was capable of earning $20,000 per year was not contrary to the weight of evidence, and the imputation of that sum as respondent's gross income was proper (see, Family Ct Act § 413 [b] [5] [v]; Hickland v Hickland, 39 N.Y.2d 1; Weiner v Weiner, 97 Misc.2d 920). Also, the Hearing Examiner did not err in refusing to award respondent a credit towards arrears in child support for moneys he voluntarily paid for his son's hockey equipment and related expenses (see, Horne v Horne, 22 N.Y.2d 219, 223; Kerpen v Kerpen, 172 A.D.2d 496).


Summaries of

Matter of Hamlin v. Kirnan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 7, 1992
186 A.D.2d 1038 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Matter of Hamlin v. Kirnan

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of BRENDA HAMLIN, Respondent, v. DONALD KIRNAN, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 7, 1992

Citations

186 A.D.2d 1038 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
588 N.Y.S.2d 475

Citing Cases

Mayeri v. Mayeri

Accordingly, we remit the matter for a hearing and determination of these issues. Contrary to the defendant's…

Matter of Gleason v. Gleason

Similarly unpersuasive is the father's argument that he should be relieved of his obligation to pay child…