Lande v. Lande

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lande v. Lande

239 A.D.2d 563, 658 N.Y.S.2d 990, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5642

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

DecidedMay 27, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 239 A.D.2d 563 (Lande v. Lande) 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

Lande v. Lande, 239 A.D.2d 563, 658 N.Y.S.2d 990, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5642 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

[564]*564The appellant demanded a hearing with respect to the reasonableness of the Law Guardian’s fees. Under the circumstances of this case, that issue cannot be determined without a hearing (see, e.g., Kelly v Kelly, 223 AD2d 625). However, since the appellant failed to make any financial disclosure to the court, she was properly denied a hearing as to her ability to pay (see, Miller-Glass v Glass, 237 AD2d 723; Mockler v Mockler, 205 AD2d 510).

We decline to review the question of whether the appellant was properly directed to turn over her medical records, since that relief was granted in prior orders from which no appeal was taken (see, Damen v North Shore Univ. Hosp., 234 AD2d 255; Haibi v Haibi, 171 AD2d 842) or from which the appeal taken by the appellant was dismissed for failure to prosecute (see, Bray v Cox, 38 NY2d 350, 355).

We find no merit to the appellant’s remaining contention. O’Brien, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

[564]*564The appellant demanded a hearing with respect to the reasonableness of the Law Guardian’s fees. Under the circumstances of this case, that issue cannot be determined without a hearing (see, e.g., Kelly v Kelly, 223 AD2d 625). However, since the appellant failed to make any financial disclosure to the court, she was properly denied a hearing as to her ability to pay (see, Miller-Glass v Glass, 237 AD2d 723; Mockler v Mockler, 205 AD2d 510).

We decline to review the question of whether the appellant was properly directed to turn over her medical records, since that relief was granted in prior orders from which no appeal was taken (see, Damen v North Shore Univ. Hosp., 234 AD2d 255; Haibi v Haibi, 171 AD2d 842) or from which the appeal taken by the appellant was dismissed for failure to prosecute (see, Bray v Cox, 38 NY2d 350, 355).

We find no merit to the appellant’s remaining contention. O’Brien, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 A.D.2d 563, 658 N.Y.S.2d 990, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5642, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lande-v-lande-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack