Ross v. Ross

Aug 5, 2002
Versions:297 A.D.2d 286
745 N.Y.S.2d 917
745 N.Y.2d 917
2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7794

*287The 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.