Cristantiello v. Cristantiello

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cristantiello v. Cristantiello

168 A.D.2d 943, 564 N.Y.S.2d 897, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16489

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

DecidedDecember 21, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 168 A.D.2d 943 (Cristantiello v. Cristantiello) 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

Cristantiello v. Cristantiello, 168 A.D.2d 943, 564 N.Y.S.2d 897, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16489 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: The court did not err in admitting evidence concerning defendant’s conduct because that evidence was not introduced to establish fault, but to show that defendant had not surreptitiously entered the premises to remove household goods.

Defendant contends that the credit card debt incurred by plaintiff during defendant’s four-month absence from the marital residence should be the separate debt of plaintiff because defendant provided in excess of $11,700 for living expenses of plaintiff and the children during his absence. The record, however, does not support defendant’s contention that he provided living expenses for plaintiff and the children during his absence.

Defendant contends that because of his disability, he should have been awarded maintenance. Having failed to raise this issue before the trial court, he is precluded from raising it on appeal. We have reviewed the other issues raised by defendant concerning equitable distribution and we find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, [944]*944Cayuga County, Corning, J.—divorce.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: The court did not err in admitting evidence concerning defendant’s conduct because that evidence was not introduced to establish fault, but to show that defendant had not surreptitiously entered the premises to remove household goods.

Defendant contends that the credit card debt incurred by plaintiff during defendant’s four-month absence from the marital residence should be the separate debt of plaintiff because defendant provided in excess of $11,700 for living expenses of plaintiff and the children during his absence. The record, however, does not support defendant’s contention that he provided living expenses for plaintiff and the children during his absence.

Defendant contends that because of his disability, he should have been awarded maintenance. Having failed to raise this issue before the trial court, he is precluded from raising it on appeal. We have reviewed the other issues raised by defendant concerning equitable distribution and we find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, [944]*944Cayuga County, Corning, J.—divorce.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 A.D.2d 943, 564 N.Y.S.2d 897, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cristantiello-v-cristantiello-nyappdiv-1990.