Halperin v. Halperin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Halperin v. Halperin

234 A.D.2d 59, 650 N.Y.S.2d 561, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12315

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

DecidedDecember 5, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 234 A.D.2d 59 (Halperin v. Halperin) 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

Halperin v. Halperin, 234 A.D.2d 59, 650 N.Y.S.2d 561, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12315 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David Saxe, J.), entered October 17, 1995, which granted plaintiffs motion for pendente lite relief to the extent of awarding plaintiff, inter alia, $475 per week tax free temporary maintenance, directing defendant to pay the mortgage, taxes, insurance and utilities on the marital home and to maintain medical and dental insurance and reimburse plaintiffs unreimbursed medical and dental expenses, and to pay $25,000 interim counsel fees, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In making the temporary maintenance award, the motion court properly considered and balanced the respective income and financial situation of the parties, their age, health, necessities and obligations, the nature and duration of the marriage, the present and future capacity of plaintiff to be self-supporting, the standard of living during the marriage, the tax consequences to the parties, and the income which the parties are capable of earning by honest efforts (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6]; Baker v Baker, 120 AD2d 374, 375). The award of interim counsel fees is necessary to enable plaintiff to proceed with the case and reflects the circumstances of the respective parties (Domestic Relations Law § 237 [a]; DeCabrera v CabreraRosete, 70 NY2d 879, 881). The appropriate remedy for any perceived inequity in a pendente lite award is a prompt trial where the facts may be examined in far greater detail and where a more accurate appraisal of the financial situation of the parties may be obtained (Moshy v Moshy, 227 AD2d 182). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David Saxe, J.), entered October 17, 1995, which granted plaintiffs motion for pendente lite relief to the extent of awarding plaintiff, inter alia, $475 per week tax free temporary maintenance, directing defendant to pay the mortgage, taxes, insurance and utilities on the marital home and to maintain medical and dental insurance and reimburse plaintiffs unreimbursed medical and dental expenses, and to pay $25,000 interim counsel fees, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In making the temporary maintenance award, the motion court properly considered and balanced the respective income and financial situation of the parties, their age, health, necessities and obligations, the nature and duration of the marriage, the present and future capacity of plaintiff to be self-supporting, the standard of living during the marriage, the tax consequences to the parties, and the income which the parties are capable of earning by honest efforts (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6]; Baker v Baker, 120 AD2d 374, 375). The award of interim counsel fees is necessary to enable plaintiff to proceed with the case and reflects the circumstances of the respective parties (Domestic Relations Law § 237 [a]; DeCabrera v CabreraRosete, 70 NY2d 879, 881). The appropriate remedy for any perceived inequity in a pendente lite award is a prompt trial where the facts may be examined in far greater detail and where a more accurate appraisal of the financial situation of the parties may be obtained (Moshy v Moshy, 227 AD2d 182). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

234 A.D.2d 59, 650 N.Y.S.2d 561, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12315, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/halperin-v-halperin-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack