His proffered evidence did not rise to the level contemplated by CPLR 5015 (a) (2). Further, after a 10-year period, more is required than a request for an HLA test to negate the appellant's prior admission of paternity (see, Matter of Constance S. v. Steven A., 130 A.D.2d 493, 494; Patricia W. v. Michael R., 113 A.D.2d 935, 936). Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Rubin, JJ., concur.
The respondent has not presented any proof that he is not the father of the child. Under these circumstances "something other than a request for a HLA test is required to negate [the respondent's] prior admission of being the natural father" (Patricia W. v Michael R., 113 A.D.2d 935, 936). We have considered the respondent's other contentions and find them to be without merit.
She is estopped from raising the issue. Had the petitioner not voluntarily participated in the HLA testing it is unlikely that the respondent could have obtained an order requiring her to submit to the HLA test. (Patricia W. v Michael R., 113 A.D.2d 935.) Without such acquiescence the respondent might have been precluded from asserting his very tardy claim, for the sole purpose of "promoting his own self-interest in avoiding further support payments."
The respondent has not presented any proof that he is not the father of the child. Under these circumstances 'something other than a request for a HLA test is required to negate [the respondent's] prior admission of being the natural father' (Patricia W. v Michael R., 113 A.D.2d 935, 936)." (Supra, at 494.)