IN THE MATTER OF ROSS v. ROSS

ORDERED that the appeals from the orders entered November 15, 1999, are dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeals lie therefrom (see Family Ct Act § 439[e]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the order entered February 1, 2001 is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

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 A.D.2d 111, 112; see Domestic Relations Law § 236B[9][b]). The Family Court properly determined that the father failed to do so (see Clark v. Clark, 280 A.D.2d 575; Mishrick v. Mishrick, 251 A.D.2d 558).

The father's remaining contentions are without merit.

PRUDENTI, P.J., SMITH, FRIEDMANN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.