Sofien v. Noel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sofien v. Noel

60 A.D.3d 1387, 874 N.Y.S.2d 839

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 20, 2009·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Niagara County (Ralph A. Boniello, III, J.), entered January 25, 2008. The order denied the request of plaintiff Judith Diane Noel for maintenance.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Contrary to the contention of Judith Diane Noel (plaintiff), Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in adopting the report and decision of the Matrimonial Referee declining to award her maintenance (see generally Holmes v Holmes, 25 AD3d 931, 932 [2006]). The Matrimonial Referee properly determined, after considering the predivorce standard of living as well as the other factors set forth in Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (6) (a), that an award of maintenance to plaintiff was not warranted (see Boardman v Boardman, 300 AD2d 1110 [2002]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Smith, Peradotto, Garni and Green, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Niagara County (Ralph A. Boniello, III, J.), entered January 25, 2008. The order denied the request of plaintiff Judith Diane Noel for maintenance.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Contrary to the contention of Judith Diane Noel (plaintiff), Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in adopting the report and decision of the Matrimonial Referee declining to award her maintenance (see generally Holmes v Holmes, 25 AD3d 931, 932 [2006]). The Matrimonial Referee properly determined, after considering the predivorce standard of living as well as the other factors set forth in Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (6) (a), that an award of maintenance to plaintiff was not warranted (see Boardman v Boardman, 300 AD2d 1110 [2002]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Smith, Peradotto, Garni and Green, JJ.

Sofien v. Noel, 60 A.D.3d 1387, 874 N.Y.S.2d 839 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

60 A.D.3d 1387 (Sofien v. Noel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related