WILLIAM F. MASTRO
Rollo T. French, named herein as Rollo French, Sr., Brooklyn, N.Y., appellant pro se.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., PETER B. SKELOS, JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, and CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JJ.
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from a corrected order of the Family Court, Kings County (Turbow, J.), dated July 17, 2012, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Shamahs, S.M.), dated May 10, 2012, which dismissed without prejudice his petition for modification of an order of support.
ORDERED that the corrected order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
A party seeking modification of a support order has the burden of establishing the existence of a substantial change in circumstances warranting the modification ( see Matter of Suyunov v. Tarashchansky, 98 A.D.3d 744, 950 N.Y.S.2d 399;Matter of Bouie v. Joseph, 91 A.D.3d 641, 936 N.Y.S.2d 276;Matter of Nieves–Ford v. Gordon, 47 A.D.3d 936, 850 N.Y.S.2d 588). Likewise, “ ‘[t]he burden of proof as to emancipation is on the party asserting it’ ” (Matter of Gold v. Fisher, 59 A.D.3d 443, 444, 873 N.Y.S.2d 139, quoting Schneider v. Schneider, 116 A.D.2d 714, 715, 498 N.Y.S.2d 23). Here, the record supports the Support Magistrate's determination that the father failed to satisfy his prima facie burden of establishing that his son was economically independent, and thus, in effect, emancipated ( see Matter of Burr v. Fellner, 73 A.D.3d 1041, 900 N.Y.S.2d 656;see generally Matter of Alice C. v. Bernard G.C., 193 A.D.2d 97, 602 N.Y.S.2d 623). Accordingly, the Family Court properly denied the father's objections to the Support Magistrate's order dismissing without prejudice his petition for modification of an order of support.