Mircea v. Mircea

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mircea v. Mircea

224 A.D.2d 697, 638 N.Y.S.2d 744, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1847

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

DecidedFebruary 26, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 224 A.D.2d 697 (Mircea v. Mircea) 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

Mircea v. Mircea, 224 A.D.2d 697, 638 N.Y.S.2d 744, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1847 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the husband appeals from so much of an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Pach, J.), entered April 12, 1994, which denied his objection to so much of an order of the same court (Buse, H.E.), entered February 22, 1994, as directed him to pay maintenance of $30 per week.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the husband’s objection to the order entered February 22, 1994, is sustained.

Pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (6) (a) (1), the income and property of the respective parties is to be considered when determining the amount and duration of maintenance. The Family Court, therefore, erred by failing to consider the $40,000 that the wife admitted she had in a safe deposit box. Bracken, J. P., Miller, Joy, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

—In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the husband appeals from so much of an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Pach, J.), entered April 12, 1994, which denied his objection to so much of an order of the same court (Buse, H.E.), entered February 22, 1994, as directed him to pay maintenance of $30 per week.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the husband’s objection to the order entered February 22, 1994, is sustained.

Pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (6) (a) (1), the income and property of the respective parties is to be considered when determining the amount and duration of maintenance. The Family Court, therefore, erred by failing to consider the $40,000 that the wife admitted she had in a safe deposit box. Bracken, J. P., Miller, Joy, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 A.D.2d 697, 638 N.Y.S.2d 744, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1847, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mircea-v-mircea-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack