Palamara v. Palamara

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Palamara v. Palamara

279 A.D.2d 559, 719 N.Y.S.2d 608, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 577

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 22, 2001·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Molía, J.), dated July 6, 1999, as granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was for an award of maintenance and an attorney’s fee pendente lite.

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as awarded the defendant an attorney’s fee pendente lite is dismissed as withdrawn; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

Ordered that the defendant is awarded one bill of costs.

The Supreme Court’s award of maintenance pendente lite was a reasonable accommodation between the plaintiffs means and the defendant’s needs, considering the parties’ preseparation standard of living (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6]). Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, the parties’ conflicting allegations should be resolved at trial, when they can be fully explored (see, Wolfson v Wolfson, 272 AD2d 470). Ritter, J. P., Friedmann, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Molía, J.), dated July 6, 1999, as granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was for an award of maintenance and an attorney’s fee pendente lite.

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as awarded the defendant an attorney’s fee pendente lite is dismissed as withdrawn; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

Ordered that the defendant is awarded one bill of costs.

The Supreme Court’s award of maintenance pendente lite was a reasonable accommodation between the plaintiffs means and the defendant’s needs, considering the parties’ preseparation standard of living (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6]). Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, the parties’ conflicting allegations should be resolved at trial, when they can be fully explored (see, Wolfson v Wolfson, 272 AD2d 470). Ritter, J. P., Friedmann, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.

Palamara v. Palamara, 279 A.D.2d 559, 719 N.Y.S.2d 608, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 577 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

279 A.D.2d 559 (Palamara v. Palamara) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related