Hirschhorn v. Hirschhorn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hirschhorn v. Hirschhorn

74 A.D.3d 886, 902 N.Y.S.2d 375

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

DecidedJune 8, 2010

StatusPublished

This text of 74 A.D.3d 886 (Hirschhorn v. Hirschhorn) 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

Hirschhorn v. Hirschhorn, 74 A.D.3d 886, 902 N.Y.S.2d 375 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brown, J.), entered March 25, 2009, as, upon a decision of the same court dated October 28, 2008, made after a nonjury trial, in effect, dismissed her counterclaim.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

In reviewing a determination made after a nonjury trial, the power of this Court is as broad as that of the trial court, and the Appellate Division may render the judgment it finds warranted by the facts, bearing in mind that in a close case, the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses (see Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]; Powers v Wilson, 56 AD3d 639, 640-641 [2008]; Rosenberg v Rosenberg, 44 AD3d 1022, 1024 [2007]). We find no basis in the record to disturb the Supreme Court’s determination that the plaintiff was not equitably estopped from enforcing a provision of the parties’ separation agreement which precluded recovery by the defendant on the counterclaim.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either without merit or not properly before this Court. Rivera, J.P., Florio, Miller and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brown, J.), entered March 25, 2009, as, upon a decision of the same court dated October 28, 2008, made after a nonjury trial, in effect, dismissed her counterclaim.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

In reviewing a determination made after a nonjury trial, the power of this Court is as broad as that of the trial court, and the Appellate Division may render the judgment it finds warranted by the facts, bearing in mind that in a close case, the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses (see Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]; Powers v Wilson, 56 AD3d 639, 640-641 [2008]; Rosenberg v Rosenberg, 44 AD3d 1022, 1024 [2007]). We find no basis in the record to disturb the Supreme Court’s determination that the plaintiff was not equitably estopped from enforcing a provision of the parties’ separation agreement which precluded recovery by the defendant on the counterclaim.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either without merit or not properly before this Court. Rivera, J.P., Florio, Miller and Austin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 A.D.3d 886, 902 N.Y.S.2d 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hirschhorn-v-hirschhorn-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack