Cates v. Cates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cates v. Cates

54 A.D.2d 858, 388 N.Y.S.2d 303, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14634

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 16, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 54 A.D.2d 858 (Cates v. Cates) 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

Cates v. Cates, 54 A.D.2d 858, 388 N.Y.S.2d 303, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14634 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on August 25, 1975, as amended by order of said court entered on October 20, 1975, awarding plaintiff unpaid alimony, child support and counsel fees, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of striking the allowance for counsel fees and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. This is [859]*859nothing more than a contract action and is not one based upon any provision of the Domestic Relations Law. Accordingly, since there is no contractual provision for counsel fees, there was no basis for such an award. (See Riemer v Riemer, 31 AD2d 482, 487.) We have examined the other points raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Concur&emdash; Lupiano, J. P., Birns, Capozzoli, Lane and Nunez, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on August 25, 1975, as amended by order of said court entered on October 20, 1975, awarding plaintiff unpaid alimony, child support and counsel fees, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of striking the allowance for counsel fees and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. This is [859]*859nothing more than a contract action and is not one based upon any provision of the Domestic Relations Law. Accordingly, since there is no contractual provision for counsel fees, there was no basis for such an award. (See Riemer v Riemer, 31 AD2d 482, 487.) We have examined the other points raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Concur&emdash; Lupiano, J. P., Birns, Capozzoli, Lane and Nunez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.2d 858, 388 N.Y.S.2d 303, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14634, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cates-v-cates-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack