OCASIO v. OCASIO

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The Supreme Court correctly concluded that the defendant was equitably estopped from challenging paternity to avoid his support obligation (see, Brian B. v. Dionne B., 267 A.D.2d 188; Matter of Weiller v. Weiller, 267 A.D.2d 390; John R. v. Lynn R ., 260 A.D.2d 459; Fung v. Fung, 238 A.D.2d 375). The court applied the equitable estoppel doctrine after conducting a hearing and concluding that it was in the child's best interest to deny the defendant's motion (see, Matter of Alberto T. v. Tammy D., 274 A.D.2d 587 [2d Dept., July 31, 2000]; Matter of Ettore I. v. Angela D., 127 A.D.2d 6).