Case ID: ad2d_297/html/0286-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of Cheryl I. Ross, Respondent, v David M. Ross, Appellant.
    [745 NYS2d 917]
   The father’s cross petition sought a downward modification of his support obligations under a judgment of divorce which is subject to the terms of a separation agreement that was incorporated but not merged into the judgment. Under such circumstances, the father must demonstrate “extreme hardship” (Matter of Cohen v Seletsky, 142 AD2d 111, 112; see Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b]). The Family Court properly determined that the father failed to do so (see Clark v Clark, 280 AD2d 575; Mishrick v Mishrick, 251 AD2d 558).

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Smith, Friedmann and Adams, JJ., concur.