| Matter of Guevara v Ubillus |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 00267 [47 AD3d 715] |
| January 15, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Maria L. Guevara, Appellant, v GinaUbillus, Respondent. |
—[*1] Sean Sabeti, Jericho, N.Y. for respondent.
In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the petitioner appealsfrom an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Pessala, J.), dated December 8, 2004, whichdenied her objections to an order of the same court (Cahn, S.M.), dated August 24, 2006, which,after a hearing, denied her petition for child support.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
It is fundamental public policy in New York that parents of minor children are responsiblefor their children's support until age 21 (see Family Ct Act § 413; Matter ofRoe v Doe, 29 NY2d 188, 192-193 [1971]; Matter of Cellamare v Lakeman, 36 AD3d 906 [2007])."Nevertheless, children of employable age and in full possession of their faculties whovoluntarily and without cause abandon their home, against the will of their parents and for thepurpose of avoiding parental control, forfeit their right to demand support even if they are notfinancially self-sufficient" (Matter ofBailey v Bailey, 15 AD3d 577 [2005]; see Matter of Roe v Doe, 29 NY2d 188,192-193 [1971]; Matter of Alice C. v Bernard G.C., 193 AD2d 97, 105 [1993]).
The evidence on the record sufficiently supports the finding that the petitioner, without goodcause, abandoned the respondent's home on her 18th birthday in order to avoid parental controland to gain independence from her mother's restrictive household rules (see Matter [*2]of Roe v Doe, 29 NY2d 188 [1971]; Matter of Bailey v Bailey, 15 AD3d577 [2005]; Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v Jones-Gamble, 227 AD2d618 [1996]; cf. Matter of Drago v Drago, 138 AD2d 704, 706 [1988]). Accordingly, thereis no basis to disturb the findings of the Support Magistrate, who was in the best position toassess the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence offered, or the Family Court's ultimateconclusion that the petitioner abandoned the mother's home against the mother's will and withoutcause (see Matter of Bailey v Bailey,15 AD3d 577 [2005]). Fisher, J.P., Lifson, Covello and McCarthy, JJ., concur.