Westchester County

Published on: September 15, 2024

Court addressed maintenance, child support, and reimbursement disputes in a high-income divorce case. Tuchman v. Tuchman, 201 A.D.3d 986 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

by Stephen Bilkis

This case involved a divorce and related financial matters, including maintenance, child support, and equitable distribution. The Supreme Court, Westchester County, addressed disputes over payments, income allocation, and financial obligations between the parties. Both the plaintiff and the defendant challenged various aspects of the court’s rulings.

Background Facts

The plaintiff and defendant were married in January 1985 and had four children. At the time of the trial, two of their children were still unemancipated. In November 2012, the plaintiff filed for divorce, seeking ancillary relief. Over the course of the proceedings, the parties entered into a stipulation of settlement in June 2017, resolving issues related to equitable distribution, property, and legal fees. However, other matters, including maintenance and child support, proceeded to trial.

Published on: July 10, 2024

Leathers v. Smalls 192 A.D.3d 892 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

by Stephen Bilkis

In Leathers v. Smalls 192 A.D.3d 892 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021), a case heard by the Family Court of Westchester County, the father appealed from two court orders related to child support obligations. The case involved a dispute over the father’s compliance with a child support order and the subsequent consequences imposed by the court.

In New York, child support is determined based on a standardized formula outlined in the Child Support Standards Act (CSSA). This formula considers several factors, including each parent’s income, the number of children requiring support, and certain expenses such as daycare and medical insurance premiums. The CSSA provides a guideline percentage of the non-custodial parent’s income to be allocated for child support, with adjustments made for various circumstances such as shared custody or extraordinary expenses. Courts typically use this formula to calculate child support obligations, ensuring consistency and fairness in support determinations across cases. However, courts may deviate from the guideline amount under certain circumstances, such as when the application of the formula would be unjust or inappropriate.

Background Facts

Published on: June 23, 2011

A scam involving child support reported

by Stephen Bilkis

In Texas, child support payments didn’t make it to the receiver because of a child support scam that has three main suspects. The three have plead guilty to the crime of Child support payment mail fraud and aggravated identity theft last Tuesday. They worked for a company that does processing of child support payments for the state of Texas, reported a N York Family Lawyer. They face 20 years in prison for these charges.

Thirteen are involved in this case but three have already plead guilty. The child support payments were made with Affiliated Computer Services who had an 18.2 million dollar contract to make payments to Texans in the form of Texas debit cards. The 13 people accused took advantage of this contract and used the debit cards to buy themselves things. They gave these Texas debit cards to friends. They friends then bought things for the accused using the debit cards.

Xerox recently bought out Affiliated Computer Services. This new company paid back the debit card victims $275,000, according to the US attorney generals office.