Loving v. Loving

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Loving v. Loving

42 A.D.2d 555, 346 N.Y.S.2d 716, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4005

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

DecidedJune 28, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 42 A.D.2d 555 (Loving v. Loving) 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

Loving v. Loving, 42 A.D.2d 555, 346 N.Y.S.2d 716, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4005 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court of the State of ,New York, New York County, entered on January 23, 1973, is unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to increase the award for alimony to $1,500 monthly, and as so modified, the order is otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. The application for counsel fees on appeal is denied, the fee awarded in the Family Court being sufficient to cover the appeal. Although the marriage is one of short duration, and petitioner is capable of earning some income, the award directed by the Family Court was inadequate in view of the parties’ prior standard of living, the respondent’s financial resources, and the" fact that petitioner’s present earning capacity has materially decreased since the marriage was entered into. Concur — Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Murphy, Lane and Tilzer, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court of the State of ,New York, New York County, entered on January 23, 1973, is unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to increase the award for alimony to $1,500 monthly, and as so modified, the order is otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. The application for counsel fees on appeal is denied, the fee awarded in the Family Court being sufficient to cover the appeal. Although the marriage is one of short duration, and petitioner is capable of earning some income, the award directed by the Family Court was inadequate in view of the parties’ prior standard of living, the respondent’s financial resources, and the" fact that petitioner’s present earning capacity has materially decreased since the marriage was entered into. Concur — Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Murphy, Lane and Tilzer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 A.D.2d 555, 346 N.Y.S.2d 716, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4005, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loving-v-loving-nyappdiv-1973.