Rossetter v. Rossetter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rossetter v. Rossetter

300 A.D.2d 112, 750 N.Y.S.2d 848, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12154

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 12, 2002·Published

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Drager, J.), entered December 6, 2001, awarding defendant’s former counsel, the law firm of Stein Riso Mantel, LLP, counsel fees in the sum of $50,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from an order, same court and Justice, entered October 31, 2001, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the ensuing judgment.

In light of the motion court’s “great flexibility” in awarding interim counsel fees (De Bernardo v De Bernardo, 180 AD2d 500, 502), and the controlling equitable principles (see Charpié v Charpié, 271 AD2d 169, 171), we find that the court properly exercised its discretion in accepting, as adequate, defendant’s disclosure of her financial circumstances (cf. DiSanto v DiSanto, 279 AD2d 603). The amount of the fee award is not excessive. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Drager, J.), entered December 6, 2001, awarding defendant’s former counsel, the law firm of Stein Riso Mantel, LLP, counsel fees in the sum of $50,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from an order, same court and Justice, entered October 31, 2001, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the ensuing judgment.

In light of the motion court’s “great flexibility” in awarding interim counsel fees (De Bernardo v De Bernardo, 180 AD2d 500, 502), and the controlling equitable principles (see Charpié v Charpié, 271 AD2d 169, 171), we find that the court properly exercised its discretion in accepting, as adequate, defendant’s disclosure of her financial circumstances (cf. DiSanto v DiSanto, 279 AD2d 603). The amount of the fee award is not excessive. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.

Rossetter v. Rossetter, 300 A.D.2d 112, 750 N.Y.S.2d 848, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12154 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

300 A.D.2d 112 (Rossetter v. Rossetter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related