In the Matter of Frank S. Volvo, III v. Patricia J. Valvo

Ballston Spa, New York divorce lawyer represented the parties in a marriage dissolution.

Petitioner (hereinafter the father) and respondent (hereinafter the mother) were divorced in 2012 following a 23–year marriage. The judgment of divorce incorporated, but did not merge, a prior separation agreement that contained provisions for maintenance and child support for the parties' three children (born in 1994, 1999 and 2003). The separation agreement directed the father to pay $1,840.41 biweekly in maintenance and $1,245.34 biweekly in child support. In June 2018, the father sought to modify his maintenance and child support obligations. The Support Magistrate (Densmore, S.M.), among other things, reduced the father's child support obligation to $250 biweekly until February 2020, at which point the obligation would decrease to $200 biweekly, and left the maintenance obligation unchanged.



In August 2020, the father filed the instant petition seeking to modify his maintenance and child support obligations, alleging that his income had decreased since the time of the parties' divorce.1 The father requested that both the judgment of divorce and the 2018 order be modified to reflect a substantial reduction in salary that occurred in 2020. At the conclusion of the hearings on that petition, the Support Magistrate determined that the father had demonstrated an extreme hardship to justify a reduction in spousal support and, thus, reduced his maintenance obligation and ordered a corresponding increase in his child support obligation. The mother filed objections arguing that it was an error to modify the maintenance and child support as the father did not prove that an extreme hardship had occurred since the 2018 order, and the father submitted a rebuttal. Upon its review, Family Court granted the mother's objection, determining, among other things, that the father had failed to demonstrate an extreme hardship warranting modification of his maintenance obligations, but that he had demonstrated a sufficient change in income to warrant modification of his child support obligations. Accordingly, Family Court directed that the prior maintenance obligation be reinstated and remanded the matter to the Support Magistrate to determine the appropriate modification to the father's child support obligation, along with a corresponding recalculation of any maintenance and child support arrears.



Valvo v. Valvo, 218 A.D.3d 909, 193 N.Y.S.3d 374 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)

ORDERED that the order is modified, on the facts and the law, without costs, by reversing so much thereof as directed modification of petitioner's child support obligation; the prior child support obligation is reinstated; and, as so modified, affirmed.