Matter of Dorcean v Longueira
2007 NY Slip Op 07700 [44 AD3d 770]
October 9, 2007
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, December 12, 2007


In the Matter of Donna Dorcean, Respondent,
v
RonaldLongueira, Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Ronald Longueira, Appellant, vDonna Dorcean, Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.)

[*1]McCormack & Phillips, Nyack, N.Y. (Ronald G. McCormack of counsel), forappellant.

In two related child support proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the fatherappeals from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County (Warren, J.), entered August 22,2006, which denied his objections to so much of an order of the same court (Miklitsch, S.M.),dated October 20, 2005, which, after a hearing, inter alia, failed to grant him a credit toward hischild support obligation for college room and board expenses, and upwardly adjusted his childsupport obligation.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The parties' separation agreement, which was incorporated but not merged into theirjudgment of divorce, constituted a valid agreement to opt out of the provisions of the ChildSupport Standards Act. Contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court correctly determinedthat he was not entitled to a credit for college room and board expenses against his basic childsupport obligation. The agreement set forth the father's obligation to pay basic child support andeducational expenses in separate provisions, and characterized "dormitory expenses, room,board" as educational expenses. The provisions relating to the recalculation of the father's childsupport obligation in 2001 and every two years thereafter do not refer to his separate obligationfor educational expenses or [*2]provide for any offset or creditfor educational expenses paid. Under the circumstances, the father's payment of educationalexpenses, including room and board, cannot be credited toward basic child support (seeMatter of Meccico v Meccico, 76 NY2d 822, 824 [1990]; Tryon v Tryon, 37 AD3d 455[2007]; Guryn v Guryn, 308 AD2d 564 [2003]; Regan v Regan, 254 AD2d 402[1998]).

The separation agreement explicitly provided for an adjustment of basic child support basedupon the consumer price index.

The father's remaining contentions are without merit. Schmidt, J.P., Goldstein, Skelos andFisher, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.