Baiera v. Baiera

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baiera v. Baiera

248 A.D.2d 341, 669 N.Y.S.2d 846, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2045

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 2, 1998·Published

Opinion

—In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the wife appeals, as limited by her brief, from stated portions of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Henry, J.), dated February 20, 1997, which, inter alia, failed to credit her for sums spent in home improvements to the marital residence.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by adding thereto a provision stating that after payment of the marital debts as provided for in the judgment, the next $22,500 of [342] the proceeds from the sale of the marital residence shall be paid to the wife; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

We agree with the wife’s contention that , the court should have directed repayment to her for the expenditure of her separate, nonmarital funds toward the marital residence (see, Ciulla v Ciulla, 237 AD2d 556; Strang v Strang, 222 AD2d 975).

The wife’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the wife appeals, as limited by her brief, from stated portions of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Henry, J.), dated February 20, 1997, which, inter alia, failed to credit her for sums spent in home improvements to the marital residence.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by adding thereto a provision stating that after payment of the marital debts as provided for in the judgment, the next $22,500 of [342] the proceeds from the sale of the marital residence shall be paid to the wife; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

We agree with the wife’s contention that , the court should have directed repayment to her for the expenditure of her separate, nonmarital funds toward the marital residence (see, Ciulla v Ciulla, 237 AD2d 556; Strang v Strang, 222 AD2d 975).

The wife’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Baiera v. Baiera, 248 A.D.2d 341, 669 N.Y.S.2d 846, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2045 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

248 A.D.2d 341 (Baiera v. Baiera) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related