From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

VAN NIEL v. VAN NIEL

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 1, 1983
93 A.D.2d 986 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Opinion

April 1, 1983

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mastrella, J.

Present — Dillon, P.J., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Schnepp, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Monroe County, for a hearing, in accordance with the following memorandum: When a party seeks modification of a prior support order based upon a change in circumstances, the court should conduct a full hearing to determine whether the alleged change warrants modification (see Huber v Huber, 59 A.D.2d 1063; Matter of Monesi v Monesi, 55 A.D.2d 1020; Rollins v Rollins, 33 A.D.2d 990). If such a request for increased child support is predicated on the child's right to receive adequate support, the principles iterated in Matter of Boden v Boden ( 42 N.Y.2d 210) do not alter the court's power to order support ( Matter of Brescia v Fitts, 56 N.Y.2d 132, 139-140). It is no longer necessary to demonstrate an unanticipated and unreasonable change in circumstances to justify an increase. "It is sufficient in such a case that a change in circumstances has occurred warranting the increase in the best interests of the child" ( Matter of Michaels v Michaels, 56 N.Y.2d 924, 926; Pfleger v Westfall, 90 A.D.2d 978). Inasmuch as the moving papers raise disputed issues of fact as to these matters, it was improper to deny the petition without conducting a hearing on the issue.


Summaries of

VAN NIEL v. VAN NIEL

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 1, 1983
93 A.D.2d 986 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)
Case details for

VAN NIEL v. VAN NIEL

Case Details

Full title:GALE VAN NIEL, Appellant, v. ROBERT VAN NIEL, Respondent

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

Date published: Apr 1, 1983

Citations

93 A.D.2d 986 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Citing Cases

Verrone v. Voegtle

County, for a hearing, in accordance with the following memorandum: Petitioner appeals from denial of her…

Szablak v. Keida

According to plaintiff's financial statement, the minimum needs of the child are more than twice the amount…