Hatem v. Hatem
This text of 49 A.D.3d 812 (Hatem v. Hatem) 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.
Opinion
[813]*813The Supreme Court properly determined that the parties’ circumstances had changed in the time between the entry of a prior pendente lite order and the entry of the order appealed from, and properly granted the plaintiffs request, inter alia, for an increase in the defendant’s child support obligation.
Modifications of pendente lite awards should rarely be made by an appellate court, and then only under exigent circumstances, which do not exist here (see Swickle v Swickle, 47 AD3d 704 [2008]; DeVerna v DeVerna, 4 AD3d 323 [2004]). Fisher, J.P., Angiolillo, Balkin and Leventhal, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
49 A.D.3d 812, 853 N.Y.2d 904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hatem-v-hatem-nyappdiv-2008.