Burke v. Burke

185 A.D.2d 625, 587 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9146
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 14, 1992
DocketAppeal No. 2
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 185 A.D.2d 625 (Burke v. Burke) 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
Burke v. Burke, 185 A.D.2d 625, 587 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9146 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: It was error for Family Court to award respondent counsel fees in the sum of $4,500 for the anticipated costs of appeal (see, Sitarek v Sitarek, 179 AD2d 1065; Kieffer v Kieffer, 163 AD2d 907, 908). From our review of the record, we further find that, in light of the equities presented and the financial circumstances of the parties, the remaining counsel fee award of $3,972.90, representing approximately one-half of the total fees requested, is a just award of counsel fees to defend the prior appeal. The order of Family Court is, therefore, modified to direct petitioner to contribute $3,972.90 toward respondent’s counsel fees on the prior appeal. (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, LoRusso, J.—Counsel Fees.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Green, Lawton, Boehm and Davis, JJ.

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

Related

Deep v. Clinton Central School District
48 A.D.3d 1125 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Amy L.W. v. Brendan K.H.
37 A.D.3d 1060 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
185 A.D.2d 625, 587 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burke-v-burke-nyappdiv-1992.