Strauss v. Saadatmand

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date filed: 2012-12-20
Citations: 101 A.D.3d 573, 955 N.Y.2d 513
Copy Citations
Click to Find Citing Cases
Lead Opinion

Page 574
We do not perceive any “exigent circumstances” warranting disturbance of the modified interim award (see Anonymous v Anonymous, 63 AD3d 493, 496-497 [1st Dept 2009], appeal dismissed 14 NY3d 921 [2010]). The motion court properly directed the parties to supplement their motion papers with updated financial statements (see CPLR 2214 [c]). In any event, however, the motion court did not base the upward modification in interim child support on the parties’ updated financial information; it based the modification on the “substantial change in circumstances” represented by the reduction in defendant’s interim visitation schedule from two to three days per week to one two-hour supervised visit per week (see Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b] [2] [i]).

We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels and Clark, JJ.