Klein v. Klein-Annis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Klein v. Klein-Annis

49 A.D.3d 648, 852 N.Y.2d 785

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

DecidedMarch 11, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 49 A.D.3d 648 (Klein v. Klein-Annis) 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

Klein v. Klein-Annis, 49 A.D.3d 648, 852 N.Y.2d 785 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

[649]*649Under the facts of this case, the Family Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the mother’s objection to an order of the Support Magistrate awarding her an attorney’s fee in the sum of only $4,500. Upon consideration, inter alia, of the detailed invoices itemizing the legal services rendered by the mother’s attorney in successfully defending against the father’s application for a downward modification of his child support obligation, as well as the legal services provided in connection with the mother’s fee application, an award of an attorney’s fee in the sum of $10,000 and disbursements in the sum of $577.20 is warranted (see Family Ct Act § 438; O’Shea v O’Shea, 93 NY2d 187 [1999]; DeCabrera v Cabrera-Rósete, 70 NY2d 879 [1987]; Matter of Wolfert v Wolfert, 35 AD3d 870, 871 [2006]; Matter of Giliya v Warren, 30 AD3d 420 [2006]; Matter of Musarra v Musarra, 28 AD3d 668 [2006]). Spolzino, J.P., Florio, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

[649]*649Under the facts of this case, the Family Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the mother’s objection to an order of the Support Magistrate awarding her an attorney’s fee in the sum of only $4,500. Upon consideration, inter alia, of the detailed invoices itemizing the legal services rendered by the mother’s attorney in successfully defending against the father’s application for a downward modification of his child support obligation, as well as the legal services provided in connection with the mother’s fee application, an award of an attorney’s fee in the sum of $10,000 and disbursements in the sum of $577.20 is warranted (see Family Ct Act § 438; O’Shea v O’Shea, 93 NY2d 187 [1999]; DeCabrera v Cabrera-Rósete, 70 NY2d 879 [1987]; Matter of Wolfert v Wolfert, 35 AD3d 870, 871 [2006]; Matter of Giliya v Warren, 30 AD3d 420 [2006]; Matter of Musarra v Musarra, 28 AD3d 668 [2006]). Spolzino, J.P., Florio, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.3d 648, 852 N.Y.2d 785, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/klein-v-klein-annis-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack