Xiao-Lan Ma v. Washington, 112 A.D.3d 957 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). · Go Syfert
Xiao-Lan Ma v. Washington, 112 A.D.3d 957 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Matter of Kimelfeld v. Menczelesz (nyappdiv, 2016-03-09)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Kimelfeld v. Menczelesz
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
Objections to an order of a Support Magistrate must be filed *915 within 35 days after the date on which the order is mailed to the objecting party (see Family Ct Act § 439 [e]; Matter of Babb v Darnley, 123 AD3d 1028, 1029 [2014]; Matter of Heuser v Chavez, 117 AD3d 738, 738 [2014]; Matter of Xiao-Lan Ma v Washington, 112 AD3d 957, 957-958 [2013]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Odunbaku v. Odunbaku
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
In child support proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, objections to an order of a Support Magistrate must be filed within 35 days after the date on which the order is mailed to the objecting party (see Family Ct Act § 439 [e]; Matter of Babb v Darnley, 123 AD3d 1028, 1029 [2014]; Matter of Heuser v Chavez, 117 AD3d 738, 738 [2014]; Matter of Xiao-Lan Ma v Washington, 112 AD3d 957, 957-958 [2013]; Matter of Bodouva v Bodouva, 53 AD3d 483, 484 [2008]; Matter of Hodges v Hodges, 40 AD3d 639, 639 [2007]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Xiao-Lan Ma
v.
Anthony Valance Washington
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Dec 26, 2013.
112 A.D.3d 957
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Lebwohl, J.), dated December 21, 2012, as denied, as untimely, his objections to three orders of the same court (Stein, S.M.), each dated September 18, 2012, which, after a hearing, inter alia, directed him to pay child support to the mother.

Ordered that the order dated December 21, 2012, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Objections to an order of a support magistrate must be filed within 35 days after the date on which the order is mailed to the objecting party (see Family Ct Act § 439 [e]; Matter of Hodges v Hodges, 40 AD3d 639 [2007]; Matter of Miller v Smith, 7 AD3d 629 [2004]; Matter of Mayeri v Mayeri, 279 AD2d 473 [2001]). Here, since the father did not timely file written objections to the Support Magistrate’s orders, the Family Court properly denied the father’s objections to those orders as[*958] untimely and refused to consider them (see Matter of Roberts v Gray, 89 AD3d 951 [2011]; Matter of Bruckstein v Bruckstein, 78 AD3d 694 [2010]; Matter of Hodges v Hodges, 40 AD3d at 639; Matter of Herman v Herman, 11 AD3d 536 [2004]; Matter of Miller v Smith, 7 AD3d at 629; Matter of Chambers v Chambers, 305 AD2d 672, 673 [2003]; Matter of Mayeri v Mayeri, 279 AD2d at 473). Mastro, J.E, Rivera, Leventhal and Chambers, JJ., concur.