Gaffney-Romanello v. Romanello

82 A.D.3d 930, 918 N.Y.2d 736
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 15, 2011·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

“An award of interim counsel fees ensures that the nonmonied spouse will be able to litigate the action, and do so on equal footing with the monied spouse” (Prichep v Prichep, 52 AD3d 61, 65 [2008]; see O’Shea v O’Shea, 93 NY2d 187, 193 [1999]; Meltzer v Meltzer, 63 AD3d 702, 703 [2009]; Wald v Wald, 44 AD3d 848, 850 [2007]). Unlike a final award of counsel fees, a detailed inquiry or evidentiary hearing is not required prior to the award of interim counsel fees (see Isaacs v Isaacs, 71 AD3d 951 [2010]; Prichep v Prichep, 52 AD3d at 65). Here, based on the apparent disparity in the parties’ relative financial positions, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in awarding interim counsel fees to the plaintiff (see Domestic Relations Law § 237 [a]; Rosenbaum v Rosenbaum, 55 AD3d 713, 714 [2008]; Prichep v Prichep, 52 AD3d at 65-66).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Angiolillo, J.E, Florio, Leventhal and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Gaffney-Romanello v. Romanello, 82 A.D.3d 930, 918 N.Y.2d 736 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

82 A.D.3d 930 (Gaffney-Romanello v. Romanello) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kaufman v. Kaufman
2020 NY Slip Op 05732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Kaminash v. Levi
102 A.D.3d 837 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Miller v. Miller
94 A.D.3d 1064 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Palmeri v. Palmeri
87 A.D.3d 572 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)