Lang v. Downey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lang v. Downey

135 A.D.2d 1145, 523 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53023

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

DecidedDecember 18, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 135 A.D.2d 1145 (Lang v. Downey) 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

Lang v. Downey, 135 A.D.2d 1145, 523 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53023 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

— Motion for clarification denied. Memorandum: Appellant moves for "a clarification of the effective date of the increase in child support” as provided in our order of September 27, 1985 [113 AD2d 1013]. Our order needs no clarification. The order appealed from modified a judgment of divorce by-increasing the amount provided for child support. Our order modified that order by further increasing the amount of child support; it did not change its effective date. The notice of appeal expressly limited the issues appealed from to issues other than the effective date of the increase in child support; thus, appellant waived her right to a determination of that issue on appeal (see, 10 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 70:86, at 354). Appellant is not entitled to a determination of that issue on this motion, which is in effect an attempt to reargue the appeal. Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Green, JJ.

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

— Motion for clarification denied. Memorandum: Appellant moves for "a clarification of the effective date of the increase in child support” as provided in our order of September 27, 1985 [113 AD2d 1013]. Our order needs no clarification. The order appealed from modified a judgment of divorce by-increasing the amount provided for child support. Our order modified that order by further increasing the amount of child support; it did not change its effective date. The notice of appeal expressly limited the issues appealed from to issues other than the effective date of the increase in child support; thus, appellant waived her right to a determination of that issue on appeal (see, 10 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 70:86, at 354). Appellant is not entitled to a determination of that issue on this motion, which is in effect an attempt to reargue the appeal. Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Green, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 A.D.2d 1145, 523 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53023, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lang-v-downey-nyappdiv-1987.