Patterson v. Patterson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Patterson v. Patterson

302 A.D.2d 507, 755 N.Y.S.2d 280

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

DecidedFebruary 18, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 302 A.D.2d 507 (Patterson v. Patterson) 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

Patterson v. Patterson, 302 A.D.2d 507, 755 N.Y.S.2d 280 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Blydenburgh, J.), dated December 27, 2001, as granted that branch of the plaintiff’s cross motion which was for an award of an attorney’s fee, and directed him to pay the plaintiff an attorney’s fee in the sum of $23,157.28.

[508]*508Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for a hearing on the issue of an award of an attorney’s fee, if any, to the plaintiff.

The Supreme Court erred in awarding the plaintiff an attorney’s fee in the sum of $23,157.28 without first conducting an evidentiary hearing. Under the circumstances of this case, a hearing was necessary both to explore the relative financial circumstances of the parties (see Kiprilova v Kiprilov, 255 AD2d 362 [1998]), and to afford the defendant a “meaningful way of testing the [attorney’s] claims relative to time and value” (Price v Price, 113 AD2d 299 [1985], affd 69 NY2d 8 [1986] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see also Green v Green, 288 AD2d 436 [2001]; Nee v Nee, 240 AD2d 478 [1997]; Popack v Popack, 179 AD2d 746 [1992]). Feuerstein, J.P., Krausman, McGinity and Mastro, 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 defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Blydenburgh, J.), dated December 27, 2001, as granted that branch of the plaintiff’s cross motion which was for an award of an attorney’s fee, and directed him to pay the plaintiff an attorney’s fee in the sum of $23,157.28.

[508]*508Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for a hearing on the issue of an award of an attorney’s fee, if any, to the plaintiff.

The Supreme Court erred in awarding the plaintiff an attorney’s fee in the sum of $23,157.28 without first conducting an evidentiary hearing. Under the circumstances of this case, a hearing was necessary both to explore the relative financial circumstances of the parties (see Kiprilova v Kiprilov, 255 AD2d 362 [1998]), and to afford the defendant a “meaningful way of testing the [attorney’s] claims relative to time and value” (Price v Price, 113 AD2d 299 [1985], affd 69 NY2d 8 [1986] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see also Green v Green, 288 AD2d 436 [2001]; Nee v Nee, 240 AD2d 478 [1997]; Popack v Popack, 179 AD2d 746 [1992]). Feuerstein, J.P., Krausman, McGinity and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

302 A.D.2d 507, 755 N.Y.S.2d 280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patterson-v-patterson-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack