Rubinstein v. Bates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rubinstein v. Bates

128 A.D.2d 536, 512 N.Y.S.2d 467, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 44225

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

DecidedMarch 2, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 128 A.D.2d 536 (Rubinstein v. Bates) 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

Rubinstein v. Bates, 128 A.D.2d 536, 512 N.Y.S.2d 467, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 44225 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, inter alia, to modify the child support provisions of a judgment of divorce dated [537]*537July 2, 1980, the father appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated portions of an order of the Family Court, Putnam County (Braatz, J.), dated March 8, 1985, which, inter alia, after a hearing, (1) increased his obligation to pay child support from $75 per week to $100 per week for the 44 weeks per year during which the mother has custody of the child, (2) directed that each party pay and be responsible for one half of any uninsured or unreimbursed medical expenses of the child, provided that neither party incur more than $50 as an expense for any one medical treatment without prior notification to the other party, except in medical emergencies, and awarded the mother counsel fees in the sum of $500.

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

We concur with the determination of Family Court that in view of the substantial increase in both the income of the father and the needs and activities of the child, an upward modification of the child support award was warranted in order to insure adequate support for the child (see, Matter of Michaels v Michaels, 56 NY2d 924; Matter of Brescia v Fitts, 56 NY2d 132). We likewise perceive no basis to disturb the provision directing the father to pay one half of any uninsured or unreimbursed medical expenses of the child. The court did not abuse its discretion in denying the father’s application to obtain further pretrial discovery with respect to the mother’s finances. Finally, the award of counsel fees, inasmuch as it was supported by the affidavit of counsel and by the relative financial circumstances of the parties, was properly made (see, Silver v Silver, 63 AD2d 1017). Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Weinstein and Fiber, JJ., concur.

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

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, inter alia, to modify the child support provisions of a judgment of divorce dated [537]*537July 2, 1980, the father appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated portions of an order of the Family Court, Putnam County (Braatz, J.), dated March 8, 1985, which, inter alia, after a hearing, (1) increased his obligation to pay child support from $75 per week to $100 per week for the 44 weeks per year during which the mother has custody of the child, (2) directed that each party pay and be responsible for one half of any uninsured or unreimbursed medical expenses of the child, provided that neither party incur more than $50 as an expense for any one medical treatment without prior notification to the other party, except in medical emergencies, and awarded the mother counsel fees in the sum of $500.

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

We concur with the determination of Family Court that in view of the substantial increase in both the income of the father and the needs and activities of the child, an upward modification of the child support award was warranted in order to insure adequate support for the child (see, Matter of Michaels v Michaels, 56 NY2d 924; Matter of Brescia v Fitts, 56 NY2d 132). We likewise perceive no basis to disturb the provision directing the father to pay one half of any uninsured or unreimbursed medical expenses of the child. The court did not abuse its discretion in denying the father’s application to obtain further pretrial discovery with respect to the mother’s finances. Finally, the award of counsel fees, inasmuch as it was supported by the affidavit of counsel and by the relative financial circumstances of the parties, was properly made (see, Silver v Silver, 63 AD2d 1017). Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Weinstein and Fiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 A.D.2d 536, 512 N.Y.S.2d 467, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 44225, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rubinstein-v-bates-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack