Pordum v. Pordum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pordum v. Pordum

248 A.D.2d 953, 670 N.Y.S.2d 651

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

DecidedMarch 13, 1998

DocketAppeal No. 2

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 248 A.D.2d 953 (Pordum v. Pordum) 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

Pordum v. Pordum, 248 A.D.2d 953, 670 N.Y.S.2d 651 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memoran[954]*954dum: Supreme Court erred in directing plaintiff to pay defendant $17,189.45, the amount allegedly owed by plaintiff on the distributive award, without conducting a hearing. We therefore modify the order by vacating the award of $17,189.45 and remit this matter to Supreme Court for that purpose. We have examined the remaining contention of plaintiff and conclude that it is without merit. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Mattina, J. — Distributive Award.)

Present — Pine, J. P., Lawton, Hayes, Wisner and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memoran[954]*954dum: Supreme Court erred in directing plaintiff to pay defendant $17,189.45, the amount allegedly owed by plaintiff on the distributive award, without conducting a hearing. We therefore modify the order by vacating the award of $17,189.45 and remit this matter to Supreme Court for that purpose. We have examined the remaining contention of plaintiff and conclude that it is without merit. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Mattina, J. — Distributive Award.)

Present — Pine, J. P., Lawton, Hayes, Wisner and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 953, 670 N.Y.S.2d 651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pordum-v-pordum-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack