Lugo v. Torres

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lugo v. Torres

132 A.D.3d 824, 17 N.Y.S.3d 887

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

DecidedOctober 21, 2015

Docket2014-10673

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 132 A.D.3d 824 (Lugo v. Torres) 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

Lugo v. Torres, 132 A.D.3d 824, 17 N.Y.S.3d 887 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Susan M. Capeci, J.), entered September 26, 2014. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the defendant’s cross motion which was for an award of interim counsel fees in the sum of $40,000.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting that branch of the defendant’s cross motion which *825 was for an award of interim counsel fees in the sum of $40,000, in light of the plaintiffs conduct, which resulted in unnecessarily protracting the litigation, and the parties’ financial circumstances (see Domestic Relations Law § 237 [a]; Johnson v Chapin, 12 NY3d 461, 467 [2009]; DeCabrera v Cabrera-Rosete, 70 NY2d 879, 881 [1987]; Vistocco v Jardine, 116 AD3d 842, 844 [2014]; Prichep v Prichep, 52 AD3d 61, 65 [2008]).

Rivera, J.R, Balkin, Leventhal and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Susan M. Capeci, J.), entered September 26, 2014. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the defendant’s cross motion which was for an award of interim counsel fees in the sum of $40,000.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting that branch of the defendant’s cross motion which *825 was for an award of interim counsel fees in the sum of $40,000, in light of the plaintiffs conduct, which resulted in unnecessarily protracting the litigation, and the parties’ financial circumstances (see Domestic Relations Law § 237 [a]; Johnson v Chapin, 12 NY3d 461, 467 [2009]; DeCabrera v Cabrera-Rosete, 70 NY2d 879, 881 [1987]; Vistocco v Jardine, 116 AD3d 842, 844 [2014]; Prichep v Prichep, 52 AD3d 61, 65 [2008]).

Rivera, J.R, Balkin, Leventhal and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.3d 824, 17 N.Y.S.3d 887, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lugo-v-torres-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack