| Matter of Suyunov v Tarashchansky |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 06079 [98 AD3d 744] |
| August 29, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Boris Suyunov, Respondent, v JuliaTarashchansky, Appellant. In the Matter of Julia Tarashchansky, Appellant, v Boris Suyunov,Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.) In the Matter of Julia Tarashchansky, Appellant, v BorisSuyunov, Respondent. (Proceeding No. 3.) |
—[*1] Flora Rainer, Glendale, N.Y., for respondent.
In three related child support proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the motherappeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Toussaint, J.), dated April 11, 2011,which denied her objections to so much of an order of the same court (Baur, S.M.), dated July 7,2010, as, after a hearing, granted the father's petition for a downward modification of his childsupport obligation set forth in an order dated April 10, 2007, in effect, denied that branch of herpetition which was for an upward modification of the father's child support obligation, andgranted that branch of her separate petition which was to enforce the order dated April 10, 2007,only to the extent of directing the father to pay the sum of $363 for unreimbursed medicalexpenses.
Ordered that the order dated April 11, 2011, is affirmed, with costs.
In reviewing a determination of the Family Court, deference should be given to thecredibility determinations of the Support Magistrate, who was in the best position to evaluate thecredibility of the witnesses (see Matterof Kirchain v Smith, 84 AD3d 1237 [2011]). Here, the record supports the SupportMagistrate's findings that the father was entitled to a downward modification of his child supportobligation based upon his loss of employment.
A party seeking modification of a support order has the burden of establishing the existenceof a substantial change in circumstances warranting the modification (see Matter of Bouie v Joseph, 91 AD3d641 [2012]; Matter of Nieves-Fordv Gordon, 47 AD3d 936 [2008]). Loss of employment may constitute a substantialchange in circumstances (see Matter ofCeballos v Castillo, 85 AD3d 1161 [2011]; Baker v Baker, 83 AD3d 977 [2011]; Matter of Getty v Getty, 83 AD3d835 [2011]). A party seeking a downward modification of his or her child support obligationbased upon a loss of employment has the burden of demonstrating that he or she diligently soughtto obtain employment commensurate with his or her earning capacity (see Matter of Ceballos v Castillo, 85AD3d 1161 [2011]; Matter ofBelmonte v Dreher, 77 AD3d 937 [2010]).[*2]
Here, the father demonstrated that his loss of employmentconstituted a substantial change in circumstances and that he made a good faith effort to obtainnew employment commensurate with his qualifications and experience (see Matter of Ceballos v Castillo, 85AD3d 1161 [2011]; Matter of Gettyv Getty, 83 AD3d 835 [2011]). In response, the mother failed to prove that the fatherhad any undisclosed income, or that the father's efforts to obtain employment were fabricated.
The Support Magistrate's finding that the father did not owe child care expenses pursuant tothe prior support order dated April 10, 2007, which provided that the father was to pay one-thirdof the babysitting costs if he could not "babysit," is supported by the record.
The Support Magistrate providently exercised her discretion in disallowing the testimony ofthe mother's attorney's husband and denying admission into evidence of unauthenticateddocuments printed from the internet.
Contrary to the mother's contention, there is no indication that the Support Magistrate wasbiased against her (see Matter of FengLucy Luo v Yang, 89 AD3d 946 [2011]; Matter of Jennifer H.S. v Damien P.C., 50 AD3d 588 [2008]).
The mother's remaining contentions are without merit, or are not properly before this Courtas they were not raised in her objections to the Support Magistrate's order (see Matter of Feng Lucy Luo v Yang,89 AD3d 946 [2011]; Matter ofHicks v Hicks, 87 AD3d 1143 [2011]; Matter of Forman v Frost, 67 AD3d 908 [2009]). Skelos, J.P.,Florio, Roman and Miller, JJ., concur.