Lasek v. Lasek

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lasek v. Lasek

212 A.D.2d 1024, 624 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1902

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

DecidedFebruary 3, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 212 A.D.2d 1024 (Lasek v. Lasek) 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

Lasek v. Lasek, 212 A.D.2d 1024, 624 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1902 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs and [1025]*1025matter remitted to Monroe County Family Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Upon our review of the record, we conclude that the Hearing Examiner miscalculated the amount of college expenses for which petitioner was liable. Transportation costs and "personal expenses” incurred by the parties’ son were beyond the scope of petitioner’s obligation to pay for college expenses under the divorce judgment. Additionally, the amount owed should have been reduced by the amount of grants received by the parties’ son. We modify the order of Family Court by vacating the award of college expenses, and we remit the matter to Monroe County Family Court for recalculation of the amount of college expenses for which petitioner is liable. (Appeal from Order of Monroe County Family Court, Taddeo, J.—Child Support.) Present—Lawton, J. P., Fallon, Wesley, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs and [1025]*1025matter remitted to Monroe County Family Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Upon our review of the record, we conclude that the Hearing Examiner miscalculated the amount of college expenses for which petitioner was liable. Transportation costs and "personal expenses” incurred by the parties’ son were beyond the scope of petitioner’s obligation to pay for college expenses under the divorce judgment. Additionally, the amount owed should have been reduced by the amount of grants received by the parties’ son. We modify the order of Family Court by vacating the award of college expenses, and we remit the matter to Monroe County Family Court for recalculation of the amount of college expenses for which petitioner is liable. (Appeal from Order of Monroe County Family Court, Taddeo, J.—Child Support.) Present—Lawton, J. P., Fallon, Wesley, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 A.D.2d 1024, 624 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1902, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lasek-v-lasek-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack