Albanese v. Albanese

234 A.D.2d 489, 651 N.Y.S.2d 605, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13180
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 23, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 234 A.D.2d 489 (Albanese v. Albanese) 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
Albanese v. Albanese, 234 A.D.2d 489, 651 N.Y.S.2d 605, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13180 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

—In a matrimonial action, [490]*490the defendant husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), dated December 6, 1995, as granted the plaintiff wife maintenance and support pendente lite.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The purpose of pendente lite maintenance is to ensure that a needy spouse is provided with funds for his or her support and reasonable needs pending trial. It is not to determine the correct ultimate distribution (see, Fieland v Fieland, 229 AD2d 465; Fried v Fried, 225 AD2d 584). A pendente lite award should be an accommodation between the reasonable needs of the moving spouse and the financial ability of the other spouse, determined with due regard for the preseparation standard of living (Fieland v Fieland, supra). Modifications of pendente lite awards should rarely be made by an appellate court, and then only under exigent circumstances, such as where a party is unable to meet his or her financial obligations or justice otherwise requires (Fried v Fried, supra).

The record does not support the husband’s claim that the temporary maintenance and child support awarded here are so prohibitive as to prevent him from meeting his own financial obligations, nor does it support the claim that the court erred in determining his annual income. The best remedy for any perceived inequities in a pendente lite award is a speedy trial where the financial circumstances of the parties can be fully explored (Roach v Roach, 193 AD2d 660, 661). Pizzuto, J. P., Santucci, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

Related

J.P. v. S.M.
2025 NY Slip Op 50793(U) (New York Supreme Court, Kings County, 2025)
Barra v. Barra
2021 NY Slip Op 01022 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Jin C. v. Juliana L.
137 A.D.3d 1063 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Cristando v. Lozada
118 A.D.3d 846 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Fales v. Fales
102 A.D.3d 734 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Coven v. Coven
82 A.D.3d 1144 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
McGarrity v. McGarrity
49 A.D.3d 824 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Brooks v. Brooks
30 A.D.3d 363 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Otto v. Otto
13 A.D.3d 503 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Viola v. Viola
294 A.D.2d 493 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Frank v. Frank
260 A.D.2d 344 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Stravitz v. Stravitz
255 A.D.2d 503 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Maragni v. Maragni
250 A.D.2d 741 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Haffner v. Haffner
244 A.D.2d 526 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Wolf v. Wolf
241 A.D.2d 450 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Kolleeny v. Kolleeny
240 A.D.2d 327 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Zummo v. Zummo
237 A.D.2d 436 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
234 A.D.2d 489, 651 N.Y.S.2d 605, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/albanese-v-albanese-nyappdiv-1996.