Altner v. Altner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Altner v. Altner

281 A.D.2d 379, 721 N.Y.S.2d 279, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5046

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 5, 2001·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated January 29, 1991, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Milano, J.), dated June 5, 2000, which granted the defendant’s motion, in effect, to modify an order of the same court dated January 17, 2000, by awarding her 50% of the interest accrued on a Thrift Savings Plan.

Ordered that the order dated June 5, 2000, is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is denied, and the order dated January 17, 2000, is reinstated.

The parties’ stipulation of settlement provided that the defendant was to receive 50% of the value of the plaintiff’s Thrift Savings Plan as of October 1990, and did not provide that she was to receive 50% of the interest which accumulated in the plan after that date. Thus, the Supreme Court erred in modifying its order to include an award of that interest (see, McWade v McWade, 253 AD2d 798; Twiss v Twiss, 245 AD2d 502). Bracken, Acting P. J., S. Miller, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

—In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated January 29, 1991, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Milano, J.), dated June 5, 2000, which granted the defendant’s motion, in effect, to modify an order of the same court dated January 17, 2000, by awarding her 50% of the interest accrued on a Thrift Savings Plan.

Ordered that the order dated June 5, 2000, is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is denied, and the order dated January 17, 2000, is reinstated.

The parties’ stipulation of settlement provided that the defendant was to receive 50% of the value of the plaintiff’s Thrift Savings Plan as of October 1990, and did not provide that she was to receive 50% of the interest which accumulated in the plan after that date. Thus, the Supreme Court erred in modifying its order to include an award of that interest (see, McWade v McWade, 253 AD2d 798; Twiss v Twiss, 245 AD2d 502). Bracken, Acting P. J., S. Miller, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Altner v. Altner, 281 A.D.2d 379, 721 N.Y.S.2d 279, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5046 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

281 A.D.2d 379 (Altner v. Altner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related