I.Q. v. A.Q.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

I.Q. v. A.Q.

228 A.D.2d 301, 643 N.Y.2d 587, 643 N.Y.S.2d 587, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7122

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 18, 1996·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Domestic strife is a recognized standard for an award of temporary exclusive possession (Belli Venneri v Belli Venneri, 120 AD2d 238, 240). The existence of such strife is defendant’s stated reason for having left the marital home, and his use for storage of a portion of it—a second apartment that was combined with the first and then separated again by stipulation after commencement of the action. There being no dispute of a significant potential for strife should defendant return, and no genuine issue raised that defendant’s exclusion would cause him more than minimal disruption, the motion court’s award of temporary exclusive possession, without a hearing, was a proper exercise of discretion (see, Judell v Judell, 128 AD2d 416; Tillinger v Tillinger, 141 AD2d 535). Defendant’s remedy for any inequity in this temporary award is a speedy trial (Wolfe v Wolfe, 111 AD2d 809). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Ross, Tom and Mazzarell, JJ.

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

Domestic strife is a recognized standard for an award of temporary exclusive possession (Belli Venneri v Belli Venneri, 120 AD2d 238, 240). The existence of such strife is defendant’s stated reason for having left the marital home, and his use for storage of a portion of it—a second apartment that was combined with the first and then separated again by stipulation after commencement of the action. There being no dispute of a significant potential for strife should defendant return, and no genuine issue raised that defendant’s exclusion would cause him more than minimal disruption, the motion court’s award of temporary exclusive possession, without a hearing, was a proper exercise of discretion (see, Judell v Judell, 128 AD2d 416; Tillinger v Tillinger, 141 AD2d 535). Defendant’s remedy for any inequity in this temporary award is a speedy trial (Wolfe v Wolfe, 111 AD2d 809). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Ross, Tom and Mazzarell, JJ.

I.Q. v. A.Q., 228 A.D.2d 301, 643 N.Y.2d 587, 643 N.Y.S.2d 587, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7122 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

228 A.D.2d 301 (I.Q. v. A.Q.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related