Dunay v. Dunay

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dunay v. Dunay

26 A.D.2d 542, 271 N.Y.S.2d 682, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3810

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

DecidedJune 30, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 542 (Dunay v. Dunay) 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

Dunay v. Dunay, 26 A.D.2d 542, 271 N.Y.S.2d 682, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3810 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered April 22, 1966, unanimously modified, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs and disbursements to any party, to reduce from $250 per week to $100 per week the sum directed to be paid to plaintiff as temporary alimony for her support and for the support and maintenance of the child of the parties, as provided for in the second decretal paragraph of said order (said weekly sum to be paid in addition to rent of $625 per month as provided by the. third decretal paragraph); and to reduce the counsel fee of $2500 provided for in the fourth decretal paragraph to the sum of $1,500, to be paid one half within 15 days after entry of order hereon and the balance to be paid when the cause first appears on the Day Calendar for trial. On the basis of the record, the weekly payments for alimony and for child support, and the counsel fees, as fixed at Special Term, were excessive to the extent indicated herein. Of course, the alimony and child support awards as here fixed, based on conflicting affidavits, should have no effect upon the trial court [543]*543in its determination as to permanent alimony, if any, and the amount to be paid for the support of the child. Concur — Stevens, J. P., Eager, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.

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

Order, entered April 22, 1966, unanimously modified, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs and disbursements to any party, to reduce from $250 per week to $100 per week the sum directed to be paid to plaintiff as temporary alimony for her support and for the support and maintenance of the child of the parties, as provided for in the second decretal paragraph of said order (said weekly sum to be paid in addition to rent of $625 per month as provided by the. third decretal paragraph); and to reduce the counsel fee of $2500 provided for in the fourth decretal paragraph to the sum of $1,500, to be paid one half within 15 days after entry of order hereon and the balance to be paid when the cause first appears on the Day Calendar for trial. On the basis of the record, the weekly payments for alimony and for child support, and the counsel fees, as fixed at Special Term, were excessive to the extent indicated herein. Of course, the alimony and child support awards as here fixed, based on conflicting affidavits, should have no effect upon the trial court [543]*543in its determination as to permanent alimony, if any, and the amount to be paid for the support of the child. Concur — Stevens, J. P., Eager, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 542, 271 N.Y.S.2d 682, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3810, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunay-v-dunay-nyappdiv-1966.