Van Niel v. Van Niel
Cases that cite this one
12 later published cases cite this decision.
- Department of Social Services v. Douglas D. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
- Traynor v. Sears (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
- Szablak v. Keida (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
- Dorn v. Dorn (NYC Family Court 1987)
- Jonasse v. Jonasse (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- Burnell v. Burnell (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- Katz v. Katz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- Sharlot v. Sharlot (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Johnston v. Johnston (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Verrone v. Voegtle (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- Lewis v. Gellman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- Griffin v. Griffin (New York Family Court 1983)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
— Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Monroe County, for a hearing, in accordance with the following memorandum: When a party seeks modification of a prior support order based upon a change in circumstances, the court should conduct a full hearing to determine whether the alleged change warrants modification (see Huber v Huber, 59 AD2d 1063; Matter ofMonesi v Monesi, 55 AD2d 1020; Rollins v Rollins, 33 AD2d 990). If such a request for increased child support is predicated on the child’s right to receive adequate support, the principles iterated in Matter ofBoden v Boden (42 NY2d 210) do not alter the court’s power to order support (Matter of Brescia v Fitts, 56 NY2d 132, 139-140). It is no longer necessary to demonstrate an unanticipated and unreasonable change in circumstances to justify an increase. “It is sufficient in such a case that a change in circumstances has occurred warranting the increase in the best interests of the child” (Matter of Michaels v Michaels, 56 NY2d 924, 926; Pfleger v Westfall, 90 AD2d 978). Inasmuch as the moving papers raise disputed issues of fact as to these matters, it was improper to deny the petition without conducting a hearing on the issue. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mastrella, J. — modify divorce decree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Schnepp, JJ.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.