McMahon v. McMahon

94 A.D.3d 958, 942 N.Y.S.2d 558
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 17, 2012
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 94 A.D.3d 958 (McMahon v. McMahon) 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
McMahon v. McMahon, 94 A.D.3d 958, 942 N.Y.S.2d 558 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Palmieri, J.), dated February 17, 2011, as granted those branches of the plaintiffs motion which were for an award of pendente lite relief directing him (1) to pay the plaintiff maintenance in the sum of $26,000 per year, child support in the sum of $28,920 per year, and arrears on those awards retroactive to November 8, 2010, (2) to maintain life insurance payments, (3) to pay 84% of unreimbursed medical expenses and copays for the children, and (4) to pay interim counsel fees in the sum of $5,000.

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

“Modifications of pendente lite awards should rarely be made by an appellate court and then only under exigent circumstances, such as where a party is unable to meet his or her financial obligations, or justice otherwise requires” (Malik v Malik, 66 AD3d 968, 968 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Conyea v Conyea, 81 AD3d 869 [2011]; Avello v Avello, 72 AD3d 850 [2010]; Nealis v Nealis, 71 AD3d 851 [2010]; Maksoud v Maksoud, 71 AD3d 643 [2010]). Any perceived inequities in pendente lite support can best be remedied by a speedy trial, at which the parties’ financial circumstances can be fully explored (see Avello v Avello, 72 AD3d 850 [2010]; Levy v Levy, 72 AD3d 651 [2010]; Nealis v Nealis, 71 AD3d 851 [2010]; Maksoud v Maksoud, 71 AD3d 643 [2010]; Swickle v Swickle, 47 AD3d 704, 705 [2008]).

The defendant did not meet his burden of demonstrating exigent circumstances so as to warrant modification of the pendente lite award. Accordingly, the award will not be disturbed. Rivera, J.E, Chambers, Roman and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Rosenstock v. Rosenstock
2017 NY Slip Op 2838 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Fini v. Fini
107 A.D.3d 758 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Shane v. Shane
104 A.D.3d 837 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
94 A.D.3d 958, 942 N.Y.S.2d 558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcmahon-v-mcmahon-nyappdiv-2012.