Gilkarov v. Gilkarov

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gilkarov v. Gilkarov

91 A.D.3d 521, 936 N.Y.2d 544

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

DecidedJanuary 19, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 91 A.D.3d 521 (Gilkarov v. Gilkarov) 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

Gilkarov v. Gilkarov, 91 A.D.3d 521, 936 N.Y.2d 544 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

We see no basis in the record for disturbing the special referee’s credibility determination as to plaintiffs testimony that a house purchased during the marriage belonged to his sister (see Cooper v Cooper, 52 AD3d 429, 430 [2008]; McManus v McManus, 298 AD2d 189 [2002]). The house was properly treated as marital property subject to equitable distribution (see Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [1] [c]; Seidman v Seidman, 226 AD2d 1011, 1012 [1996]).

The court properly awarded defendant child support retroactive to the date on which custody of the parties’ children was transferred to her (see Shapiro v Shapiro, 35 AD3d 585, 587 [2006]; Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [7] [a]).

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them without merit. Concur — Andrias, J.E, Sweeny, Moskowitz, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.

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

We see no basis in the record for disturbing the special referee’s credibility determination as to plaintiffs testimony that a house purchased during the marriage belonged to his sister (see Cooper v Cooper, 52 AD3d 429, 430 [2008]; McManus v McManus, 298 AD2d 189 [2002]). The house was properly treated as marital property subject to equitable distribution (see Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [1] [c]; Seidman v Seidman, 226 AD2d 1011, 1012 [1996]).

The court properly awarded defendant child support retroactive to the date on which custody of the parties’ children was transferred to her (see Shapiro v Shapiro, 35 AD3d 585, 587 [2006]; Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [7] [a]).

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them without merit. Concur — Andrias, J.E, Sweeny, Moskowitz, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 A.D.3d 521, 936 N.Y.2d 544, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilkarov-v-gilkarov-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack