Kluge v. Kluge

159 A.D.2d 968, 552 N.Y.S.2d 771, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3258
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 16, 1990
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 159 A.D.2d 968 (Kluge v. Kluge) 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
Kluge v. Kluge, 159 A.D.2d 968, 552 N.Y.S.2d 771, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3258 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

Case held, decision reserved and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Erie County, for further proceedings, in accordance with the following memorandum: The trial court failed to comply with Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (5) (g) and (6) (b). The court must set forth the factors it considered and the reasons for its decision when making an equitable distribution of marital property and an award of maintenance, and this requirement may not be waived by either party. Mere reference to the statutory factors without a more detailed discussion of the court’s reasoning does not comply with the statutory mandate (see, Rosenstock v Rosenstock, 139 AD2d 164, 167; Hornbeck v Hornbeck, 99 AD2d 851) and precludes intelligent appellate review (see, Gape v Gape, 110 AD2d 621, 622; Pacifico v Pacifico, 101 AD2d 709). Consequently, we remit this matter to the trial court to make more detailed factual findings and set forth the reasons for its equitable distribution of marital property, its award of maintenance, and its award of counsel fees. At the same time, the trial court should determine the amount of arrearages due, giving defendant credit for all payments he made voluntarily and pursuant to a temporary order. The trial court is further directed to make a specific finding whether the balance due on a home equity loan is marital debt or the sole responsibility of defendant. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Fudeman, J. — divorce.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Green, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

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

Related

D.A. v. B.B.
2026 NY Slip Op 50279(U) (New York Supreme Court, Westchester County, 2026)
N.V. v. E.V.
2025 NY Slip Op 51731(U) (New York Supreme Court, Westchester County, 2025)
F.D. v. M.D.
2024 NY Slip Op 50482(U) (New York Supreme Court, Westchester County, 2024)
M.R. v. D.R.
2024 NY Slip Op 50295(U) (New York Supreme Court, Westchester County, 2024)
Kaufman v. Kaufman
2020 NY Slip Op 05732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Cusumano v. Cusumano
188 A.D.2d 580 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Jabri v. Jabri
175 A.D.2d 237 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
159 A.D.2d 968, 552 N.Y.S.2d 771, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kluge-v-kluge-nyappdiv-1990.