Abrusci v. Abrusci

79 A.D.2d 980, 434 N.Y.S.2d 722, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9867
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 12, 1981
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 79 A.D.2d 980 (Abrusci v. Abrusci) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Abrusci v. Abrusci, 79 A.D.2d 980, 434 N.Y.S.2d 722, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9867 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Opinion

In a matrimonial action, the plaintiff husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of divorce of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered February 28,1980, as (1) directed him to pay defendant $140 per week as alimony from the day he abandoned her, less credits for payments made to date, and (2) awarded defendant a counsel fee of $1,200. Judgment modified, on the law, by (1) changing the date “September 25, 1978” in the second decretal paragraph to “July 6,1979,” and (2) reducing the counsel fee award to $900. As so modified, judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. The award of $140 per week as alimony was a valid exercise of the court’s discretion. However, the court erred in ordering alimony payments to commence as of the date of the abandonment. Such payments may be ordered to commence, at the earliest, only as of the time the action was commenced (see Harris v Harris, 259 NY 334; Brown v Brown, 34 AD2d 907), and even then, only with a proper regard for the circumstances of the particular case (see Mittman v Mittman, 263 App Div 384). Under the particular facts of this case, the husband’s liability for alimony should run from the date that the action was commenced. In determining counsel fees, Special Term considered services rendered by the wife’s attorney during a prior proceeding in the Family Court. This was improper, for an application for counsel fees must be made during the course of the action for which the fees are sought (see Osetek v Osetek, 75 AD2d 867; Matter of Cassieri v Cassieri, 31 AD2d 927). Accordingly, we reduce the counsel fee award to $900. Hopkins, J. P., Lazer, Cohalan and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lutz v. Goldstone
38 A.D.3d 720 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Assini v. Assini
11 A.D.3d 417 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Lazaar v. Lazaar
248 A.D.2d 618 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Holbrook v. Holbrook
226 A.D.2d 831 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Walker v. Walker
577 A.2d 1218 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1990)
Maloney v. Maloney
114 A.D.2d 440 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Harness v. Harness
99 A.D.2d 658 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Greene v. Greene
90 A.D.2d 533 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Fisher v. Fisher
87 A.D.2d 808 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Wright v. Wright
411 So. 2d 1334 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
79 A.D.2d 980, 434 N.Y.S.2d 722, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9867, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abrusci-v-abrusci-nyappdiv-1981.