| Matter of Schlakman v Schlakman |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 07421 [66 AD3d 786] |
| October 13, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Geoffrey C. Schlakman,Appellant, v Joanne C. Schlakman, Respondent. |
—[*1] Kathryn S. Tusa, Smithtown, N.Y., for respondent.
In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals froman order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Budd, J.), dated December 22, 2008, whichdenied his objections to an order of the same court (Rodriguez, S.M.), dated August 27, 2008,denying, after a hearing, his petition to modify the child support provision in a stipulation ofsettlement dated November 15, 2002, which was incorporated but not merged into the partiesjudgment of divorce entered June 9, 2003.
Ordered that the order dated December 22, 2008, is affirmed, without costs ordisbursements.
A party seeking to change the support provisions contained in a stipulation of settlementincorporated but not merged into a judgment of divorce has the burden of establishing asubstantial, unanticipated, and unreasonable change in circumstances (see Matter of Ripa v Ripa, 61 AD3d766 [2009]; Matter of Broomhall vJones, 47 AD3d 711 [2008]; Matter of Chupungco v Acompado, 47 AD3d 628[2008]; Beard v Beard, 300 AD2d 268 [2002]). Although the father has shown that hisincome is less than it was at the time that his support obligation was established by thestipulation, he did not submit any evidence that he had diligently sought to increase his income.The father failed to establish that his current income is commensurate with his earning potential(see Beard v Beard, 300 AD2d at 268; Matter of Davis v Davis, 197 AD2d 622[1993]).
The father's remaining contentions are without merit. Skelos, J.P., Santucci, Belen and Hall,JJ., concur.