Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Skrodelis v. Norbergs

Skrodelis v. Norbergs

225 A.D.2d 608, 639 N.Y.2d 731, 639 N.Y.S.2d 731, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2173
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 11, 1996
StatusPublished

This text of 225 A.D.2d 608 (Skrodelis v. Norbergs) 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
Skrodelis v. Norbergs, 225 A.D.2d 608, 639 N.Y.2d 731, 639 N.Y.S.2d 731, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2173 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

Contrary to the defendant wife’s contention, under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in awarding the plaintiff husband attorney fees (see, Domestic Relations Law § 237 [b]; DeCabrera v Cabrera-Rosete, 70 NY2d 879, 881; Matter of O’Neil v O’Neil, 193 AD2d 16, 20; Hirsch v Hirsch, 142 AD2d 138, 146).

The defendant wife’s remaining contention is not preserved for appellate review and we decline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Miller, J. P., Joy, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

Related

DeCabrera v. Cabrera-Rosete
518 N.E.2d 1168 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)
Hirsch v. Hirsch
142 A.D.2d 138 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
O'Neil v. O'Neil
193 A.D.2d 16 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
225 A.D.2d 608, 639 N.Y.2d 731, 639 N.Y.S.2d 731, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2173, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skrodelis-v-norbergs-nyappdiv-1996.