Eisen v. Eisen

Full title: BARBARA EISEN, Respondent, v. MAX EISEN, Appellant

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 17, 1995

211 A.D.2d 497 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

621 N.Y.S.2d 866

Opinion

January 17, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.).

Considering, among other things, plaintiff's assets, expenses and earning capacity, and defendant's income, we find the award of maintenance pendente lite not to be excessive. Defendant's motion to relieve plaintiff's counsel was properly denied as defendant failed to demonstrate that counsel's testimony would be "necessary" in the pending litigation (H.H.B.K. 45th St. Corp. v. Stern, 158 A.D.2d 395, 396).

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Kupferman, Asch and Rubin, JJ.