Baecher v. Baecher

58 A.D.2d 821, 396 N.Y.S.2d 447, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12994
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 11, 1977·Published·Cited by 19 cases

Opinion

In a matrimonial action, defendant appeals from a judgment of divorce of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated September 1, 1975. Judgment modified, on the facts, by reducing (1) the award of alimony to the amount of $35 per week and (2) the award of child support to the amount of $30 per child per week for the two younger children. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to respondent. The record amply demonstrates that the defendant husband engaged in a course of conduct which constituted cruel and inhuman treatment endangering the plaintiff-respondent’s physical and mental well-being, and thereby rendered it unsafe and improper for her to continue to cohabit with him. The defendant’s assertion of the psychologist-client privilege (see CPLR 4507) is without merit. Although, abstractly, the privilege applies in matrimonial proceedings (see Yaron v Yaron, 83 Mise 2d 276), in this case the defendant waived his right to the privilege by actively contesting custody, thereby putting his mental and emotional well-being into issue. In addition, the defendant was not significantly prejudiced by the psychologist’s testimony, since it was primarily corroborative of testimony by the plaintiff and the two older children. Similarly, by stipulating to its use, the defendant waived any objection to Special Term’s use of the confidential probation reports. Nor was there any proof that these reports constituted a major evidentiary basis for the court’s determination. A review of these reports indicates that they are largely corroborative of testimony on the issues of divorce and custody. Although the defendant has substantial earning potential, which should be utilized, his current unemployment and work history of nine jobs in five years, cannot be ignored. The modification is not so large that it will allow the defendant to avoid his responsibility to use his actual and potential resources to fulfill his support obligations. Cohalan, J. P., Damiani, Hawkins and Mollen, JJ., concur.

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

Baecher v. Baecher, 58 A.D.2d 821, 396 N.Y.S.2d 447, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12994 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

58 A.D.2d 821 (Baecher v. Baecher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bruzzese v. Bruzzese
2017 NY Slip Op 5579 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
A.L. v. C.K.
21 Misc. 3d 933 (New York Supreme Court, 2008)
S.C. v. H.B.
2005 NY Slip Op 51484(U) (Rockland Family Court, 2005)
O'Callaghan v. Stepfamily Foundation, Inc.
292 A.D.2d 579 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Shepard v. Roll
278 A.D.2d 755 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
State Farm Mutual Insurance Companies v. Goldberg
226 A.D.2d 115 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
McDonald v. McDonald
196 A.D.2d 7 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Susan W. v. Ronald A.
147 Misc. 2d 669 (New York Supreme Court, 1990)
Ace v. State
146 Misc. 2d 954 (New York State Court of Claims, 1990)
Jenkins v. Martin
99 A.D.2d 811 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Foster v. Foster
99 A.D.2d 284 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Proschold v. Proschold
114 Misc. 2d 568 (New York Supreme Court, 1982)
Feuerman v. Feuerman
112 Misc. 2d 961 (New York Supreme Court, 1982)
State Ex Rel. Husgen v. Stussie
617 S.W.2d 414 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1981)
People ex rel. Hickox v. Hickox
64 A.D.2d 412 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)
Berk v. Berk
95 Misc. 2d 33 (NYC Family Court, 1978)
Baecher v. Baecher
61 A.D.2d 1021 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)
Perry v. Fiumano
61 A.D.2d 512 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)