Schulman v. Schulman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*1099“It is fundamental public policy in New York that parents are responsible for their children’s support until age 21” (Matter of Gold v Fisher, 59 AD3d 443, 444 [2009]; see Family Ct Act § 413; Matter of Roe v Doe, 29 NY2d 188, 192-193 [1971]; Matter of Glen L.S. v Deborah A.S., 89 AD3d 856 [2011]). “Nevertheless, under the doctrine of constructive emancipation, ‘a child of employable age who actively abandons the noncustodial parent by refusing all contact and visitation’ may forfeit any entitlement to support” (Matter of Turnow v Stabile, 84 AD3d 1385, 1386 [2011], quoting Matter of Alice C.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- In re Roe v. DoeNew York Court of Appeals · 1971
- Alice C. v. Bernard G. C.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Gold v. FisherAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Radin v. RadinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Schneider v. SchneiderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Grucci v. VillantiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Barlow v. BarlowAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Matter of Addimando v. HuertaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Jurgielewicz v. JohnstonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Matter of Shisgal v. AbelsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.