Pereira v. Pereira

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pereira v. Pereira

191 A.D.2d 351, 595 N.Y.S.2d 757

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

DecidedMarch 23, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 191 A.D.2d 351 (Pereira v. Pereira) 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

Pereira v. Pereira, 191 A.D.2d 351, 595 N.Y.S.2d 757 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marian Lewis, Special Referee), entered on or about July 23, [352]*3521992, denying defendant’s application for an upward modification of alimony, unanimously affirmed without costs.

While paragraph 7.3 of the parties’ separation agreement provides for judicial reconsideration of plaintiff’s alimony obligations in the event his gross income exceeds $52,000 a year, it does not give defendant a right to an automatic increase in alimony, and otherwise contains no guidelines for determining whether an increase is warranted. It cannot be said that the Special Referee abused her discretion in denying such an increase where defendant’s present standard of living is at least equal to her pre-separation standard of living. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marian Lewis, Special Referee), entered on or about July 23, [352]*3521992, denying defendant’s application for an upward modification of alimony, unanimously affirmed without costs.

While paragraph 7.3 of the parties’ separation agreement provides for judicial reconsideration of plaintiff’s alimony obligations in the event his gross income exceeds $52,000 a year, it does not give defendant a right to an automatic increase in alimony, and otherwise contains no guidelines for determining whether an increase is warranted. It cannot be said that the Special Referee abused her discretion in denying such an increase where defendant’s present standard of living is at least equal to her pre-separation standard of living. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 A.D.2d 351, 595 N.Y.S.2d 757, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pereira-v-pereira-nyappdiv-1993.