Decisions of Interest

The trial court erred in determining that defendant wife was not entitled to seek enforcement of a federal Form I-864 affidavit of support on the grounds that the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which required the signing of the affidavit before defendant could enter the United States as a family-sponsored immigrant, was for public benefit only and did not afford defendant a private cause of action. Moody v. Sorokina, '- N.Y.S.2d ”, 2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 00947 (4th Dept., 2/02/07) (Pine, J.).

Defendant wife emmigrated from Ukraine in 1999 to marry plaintiff. Under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, plaintiff had to submit a Form I-864 affidavit of support promising to maintain her at no less than 125% of the federal poverty line. The parties had a child and, in May 2002, defendant sought a divorce, child custody and a protection order. Defendant appealed a Supreme Court's order on support and equitable distribution issues, claiming it erred in ruling her not entitled to pursue the support affidavit's enforcement. In a case of apparent first impression, the appellate panel held that the court erred. Citing cases from Ohio, Maryland and Connecticut, it ruled that '[t]he cases that have addressed the enforceability of the Form I-864 affidavit ' by the sponsored immigrant have found that the form is a legally enforceable contract and that the sponsored immigrant 'has independent standing to enforce the sponsor's obligation' in any federal or state court.'