AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

In the Matter of TAMMY GRUTTADAURIA, Respondent-Appellant, v. FERDINAND CATAPANO, Appellant-Respondent.

Ordered that the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Suffolk County, to set forth the factors considered and the reasons for its determination to apply the statutory formula of the Child Support Standards Act to the combined parental income over $80,000, and the appeal is held in abeyance and the father shall continue to pay child support of $769.40 per week in the interim. The Family Court, Suffolk County, is to file its report with all convenient speed.

In calculating the amount of the child support award pursuant to the provisions of the Child Support Standards Act ( see, Family Ct Act § 413; Domestic Relations Law § 240), the Family Court opted to apply the child support percentage (here 17%) to the combined parental income over $80,000. While the statute explicitly vests discretion in the Family Court to apply the child support percentage to income over $80,000, rather than apply the factors set forth in Family Court Act § 413 Fam. Ct. Act (1) (f), there must be some "record articulation of the reasons for the court's choice * * * to facilitate * * * review" ( Matter of Cassano v. Cassano, 85 N.Y.2d 649, 655). Inasmuch as the Family Court failed to sufficiently articulate the reasons for its decision, we find it appropriate to remit the matter to the Family Court to set forth the factors it considered and the reasons for its determinations ( see, Zaremba v. Zaremba, 222 A.D.2d 500).

No other issues are reached at this time.

Mangano, P. J., Copertino, Thompson and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF GRUTTADAURIA v. CATAPANO
(May 11, 1998)