De Pasquale v. De Pasquale

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

De Pasquale v. De Pasquale

92 A.D.2d 929, 460 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17337

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

DecidedMarch 28, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 92 A.D.2d 929 (De Pasquale v. De Pasquale) 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

De Pasquale v. De Pasquale, 92 A.D.2d 929, 460 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17337 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a matrimonial action, the defendant husband appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ruskin, J.), entered August 30,1982, as directed him to continue to pay carrying charges for the upkeep of the marital residence and $100 per week for the support and maintenance of the plaintiff wife and the parties’ children, and as denied defendant’s cross motion for partial summary judgment. Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements. Under the circumstances of this case, Special Term did not abuse its discretion in ordering a continuance of the defendant’s payment of $100 per week for support of his wife and children plus [930]*930the carrying charges for the upkeep of the marital home. We also find there are triable issues of fact with reference to the New Hampshire property. Mollen, P. J., Lazer, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

— In a matrimonial action, the defendant husband appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ruskin, J.), entered August 30,1982, as directed him to continue to pay carrying charges for the upkeep of the marital residence and $100 per week for the support and maintenance of the plaintiff wife and the parties’ children, and as denied defendant’s cross motion for partial summary judgment. Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements. Under the circumstances of this case, Special Term did not abuse its discretion in ordering a continuance of the defendant’s payment of $100 per week for support of his wife and children plus [930]*930the carrying charges for the upkeep of the marital home. We also find there are triable issues of fact with reference to the New Hampshire property. Mollen, P. J., Lazer, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 A.D.2d 929, 460 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-pasquale-v-de-pasquale-nyappdiv-1983.