Oppenheim v. Oppenheim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Oppenheim v. Oppenheim

75 A.D.2d 888, 428 N.Y.S.2d 1011, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11531

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

DecidedMay 27, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 75 A.D.2d 888 (Oppenheim v. Oppenheim) 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

Oppenheim v. Oppenheim, 75 A.D.2d 888, 428 N.Y.S.2d 1011, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11531 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

In a matrimonial action, the defendant appeals, as limited by her notice of appeal and brief, from so much of a judgment of divorce of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated November 27, 1978, as denied her alimony and awarded a counsel fee of only $2,000. Judgment modified, on the facts, by increasing the counsel fee by $318.80 so as to include codnsel’s disbursements. As so modified, judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. We agree that defendant has failed to establish her entitlement to alimony considering the respective circumstances of the parties, her annual salary, and her ability to be self-supporting. The counsel fee awarded was inadequate only to the extent indicated. Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a matrimonial action, the defendant appeals, as limited by her notice of appeal and brief, from so much of a judgment of divorce of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated November 27, 1978, as denied her alimony and awarded a counsel fee of only $2,000. Judgment modified, on the facts, by increasing the counsel fee by $318.80 so as to include codnsel’s disbursements. As so modified, judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. We agree that defendant has failed to establish her entitlement to alimony considering the respective circumstances of the parties, her annual salary, and her ability to be self-supporting. The counsel fee awarded was inadequate only to the extent indicated. Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 A.D.2d 888, 428 N.Y.S.2d 1011, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oppenheim-v-oppenheim-nyappdiv-1980.