Karnilaw v. Karnilaw

110 A.D.2d 685
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 8, 1985·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Based upon this record, and particularly the conflicting affidavits submitted by the parties, it cannot be said that the award of temporary maintenance was deficient. Nor did Special Term abuse its discretion in denying interim counsel fees. The record discloses, however, that defendant’s net worth statement is incomplete, and in light of defendant’s contention that his business is close to bankruptcy, an award of $1,000 so as to permit plaintiff’s accountant to examine defendant’s financial status is appropriate. Titone, J. P., Bracken, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

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

Karnilaw v. Karnilaw, 110 A.D.2d 685 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

110 A.D.2d 685 (Karnilaw v. Karnilaw) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fischman v. Fischman
209 A.D.2d 916 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Richter v. Richter
131 A.D.2d 453 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)