From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zaid S. v. Yolanda N.A.A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 2005
24 A.D.3d 118 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

6843.

December 1, 2005.

Order, Family Court, New York County (Gloria Sosa-Lintner, J.), entered on or about December 19, 2003, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by petitioner's brief, denied petitioner's application to cancel, reduce or suspend payment of his child support arrears, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Saxe, J.P., Ellerin, Williams, Catterson and Malone, JJ., concur.


Under Family Court Act § 451, the court has no discretion to cancel, reduce or otherwise modify child support arrears accrued prior to the making of an application for such relief. "Child support arrears must be awarded in full, regardless of whether the defaulter has good cause for having failed to seek modification prior to their accumulation" ( Matter of Dox v. Tynon, 90 NY2d 166, 174). There is no exception for arrears accrued during a period of incarceration ( see Matter of Onondaga County Dept. of Social Servs. v. Timothy S., 294 AD2d 27, 29, citing, inter alia, Matter of Knights v. Knights, 71 NY2d 865). Nor is there an exception for arrears that petitioner claims are frustrating his efforts to obtain the driver's license he needs for gainful employment.


Summaries of

Zaid S. v. Yolanda N.A.A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 2005
24 A.D.3d 118 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Zaid S. v. Yolanda N.A.A.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ZAID S., Appellant, v. YOLANDA N.A.A., Respondent

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

Date published: Dec 1, 2005

Citations

24 A.D.3d 118 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
804 N.Y.S.2d 742

Citing Cases

SR v. Pratt

port his or her child until the age of 21 (see Family Ct. Act § 413[1][a] ; Matter of Chemung County Support…

Piccarreto v. Mura

Williams v. Chapman, 22 AD3d 1015, 1016 (3rd Dept. 2005). This court has no discretion to cancel, reduce or…