Rohrs v. Rohrs
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*318The Supreme Court properly imputed income to the plaintiff from his house-painting business. That court properly found that the plaintiff’s testimony with respect to this income was incredible. A court is not bound by a party’s account of his or her own finances, and where a party’s account is not believable, the court is justified in finding a true or potential income higher than that claimed (see Matter of Thomas v DeFalco, 270 AD2d 277).
In calculating the plaintiff’s child support obligation, the Supreme Court failed to comply with Domestic Relations Law § 240 (1-b) (b) (5) (vii) (C), by…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- MATTER OF CASSANO v. CassanoNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- Jablonski v. JablonskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Polychronopoulos v. PolychronopoulosAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Frei v. PearsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Lekutanaj v. LekutanajAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Lee v. LeeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Bibas v. BibasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- McLoughlin v. McLoughlinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Yarinsky v. YarinskyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Levy v. LevyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.