Rogers v. Rogers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rogers v. Rogers

137 A.D.2d 749, 525 N.Y.S.2d 573, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1935

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 137 A.D.2d 749 (Rogers v. Rogers) 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

Rogers v. Rogers, 137 A.D.2d 749, 525 N.Y.S.2d 573, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1935 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant husband appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered August 12, 1987, as (1) granted the plaintiffs supplemental motion for leave to serve an amended complaint, and (2) granted that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was for counsel fees pendente lite to the extent of awarding counsel fees of $3,000.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

There was no abuse of discretion in allowing the service of an amended complaint and in the award of counsel fees pendente lite. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown, Weinstein and Spatt, 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 husband appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered August 12, 1987, as (1) granted the plaintiffs supplemental motion for leave to serve an amended complaint, and (2) granted that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was for counsel fees pendente lite to the extent of awarding counsel fees of $3,000.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

There was no abuse of discretion in allowing the service of an amended complaint and in the award of counsel fees pendente lite. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown, Weinstein and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A.D.2d 749, 525 N.Y.S.2d 573, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1935, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-rogers-nyappdiv-1988.