Dunnan v. Dunnan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dunnan v. Dunnan

293 A.D.2d 345, 740 N.Y.S.2d 195, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3785

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

DecidedApril 16, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 293 A.D.2d 345 (Dunnan v. Dunnan) 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

Dunnan v. Dunnan, 293 A.D.2d 345, 740 N.Y.S.2d 195, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3785 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered February 6, 2001, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, confirmed a Special Referee’s recommendation to deny plaintiff husband’s motion for a downward modification of maintenance, and awarded defendant wife attorneys’ fees of $20,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff fails to show a change of circumstances warranting a downward modification of maintenance (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b]). Although plaintiff’s income from employment is less than the severance payments he was receiving at the time of the maintenance award, no basis exists to disturb the Special Referee’s findings that he has managed to maintain his predivorce lavish lifestyle, and that, absent credible testimony explaining how, his actual or potential assets and income from sources other than employment must be greater than he claims (see, Kardanis v Veils, 90 AD2d 727; Mellen v Mellen, 260 AD2d 609, 609-610). The award of attorneys’ fees was properly based on the foregoing findings and the parties’ relative financial circumstances (see, Charpie v Charpie, 271 AD2d 169, 171-172). Plaintiff waived any right he had to an evidentiary hearing on the issue of attorneys’ fees by failing to object to the submission of the issue on papers or to otherwise request such a hearing (see, Beal v Beal, 196 AD2d 471, 473). Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Sullivan, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered February 6, 2001, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, confirmed a Special Referee’s recommendation to deny plaintiff husband’s motion for a downward modification of maintenance, and awarded defendant wife attorneys’ fees of $20,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff fails to show a change of circumstances warranting a downward modification of maintenance (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b]). Although plaintiff’s income from employment is less than the severance payments he was receiving at the time of the maintenance award, no basis exists to disturb the Special Referee’s findings that he has managed to maintain his predivorce lavish lifestyle, and that, absent credible testimony explaining how, his actual or potential assets and income from sources other than employment must be greater than he claims (see, Kardanis v Veils, 90 AD2d 727; Mellen v Mellen, 260 AD2d 609, 609-610). The award of attorneys’ fees was properly based on the foregoing findings and the parties’ relative financial circumstances (see, Charpie v Charpie, 271 AD2d 169, 171-172). Plaintiff waived any right he had to an evidentiary hearing on the issue of attorneys’ fees by failing to object to the submission of the issue on papers or to otherwise request such a hearing (see, Beal v Beal, 196 AD2d 471, 473). Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Sullivan, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

293 A.D.2d 345, 740 N.Y.S.2d 195, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3785, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunnan-v-dunnan-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack