Matter of Haleniuk v Persaud, 2011 NY Slip Op 08480 [89 AD3d 601]

November 22, 2011

Appellate Division, First Department

— [*1]

Michael J. Reilly, Kew Gardens, for appellant.

Schoeman, Updike & Kaufman, LLP, New York (Beth L. Kaufman of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Family Court, New York County (Rhoda J. Cohen, J.), entered on or about August 27, 2010, which granted respondent mother’s objections to the Support Magistrate’s April 19, 2010 order terminating petitioner father’s support obligation, vacated the order, dismissed the father’s petition for constructive emancipation, reinstated the order of support, and remanded the matter to the Support Magistrate to address the remaining petitions, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The evidence in the record sufficiently supports Family Court’s finding that the father failed to meet his burden of showing that the child was constructively emancipated ( see O’Sullivan v Katz , 81 AD3d 480 [2011]). Although the record reflects a strained relationship between the father and child, it does not support a finding that the child completely refused to have a relationship with the father ( see id. ).

The father’s failure to properly file a full record on appeal, despite his contrary statement made pursuant to CPLR 5531, warrants the imposition of costs incurred in preparing and filing a respondent’s appendix ( see CPLR 5528 [e]; 22 NYCRR 600.10 [c] [1]).

We need not remand to the Support Magistrate to consider the father’s arguments regarding a credit and his obligation to pay college expenses, as Family Court already provided for such relief in the order appealed from. Concur—Moskowitz, J.P., Renwick, DeGrasse, Abdus-Salaam and RomÁn, JJ..