Hartcorn v. Hartcorn

299 A.D.2d 395, 749 N.Y.S.2d 441
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 12, 2002
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 299 A.D.2d 395 (Hartcorn v. Hartcorn) 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
Hartcorn v. Hartcorn, 299 A.D.2d 395, 749 N.Y.S.2d 441 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated August 23, 1990, entered upon the defendant’s default in answering or appearing, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (McNulty, J.), dated August 20, 2001, which, inter alia, denied that branch of his motion which was to vacate so much of the judgment as awarded the plaintiff maintenance.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to vacate so much of the judgment of divorce as awarded the plaintiff maintenance and to cancel the arrears that accrued thereunder, because the defendant failed to seek such relief in a timely manner (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Cook v Cook, 260 AD2d 160).

To the extent the defendant contends that he otherwise demonstrated good cause for the cancellation of maintenance arrears, that issue is not properly before the court on this appeal. That argument should have been made on an appeal from a prior order of the Family Court which awarded the arrears.

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Altman, Friedmann and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Alexander v. New York City Transit Authority
70 A.D.3d 876 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Gainey v. Anorzej
25 A.D.3d 650 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Terlizzese v. Robinson's Custom Service, Inc.
25 A.D.3d 547 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Mauro v. Mauro
13 A.D.3d 345 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
299 A.D.2d 395, 749 N.Y.S.2d 441, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartcorn-v-hartcorn-nyappdiv-2002.