Opinion
CA 03-00579
October 2, 2003.
Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Monroe County (Ark, J.), entered January 29, 2002, which, inter alia, dismissed defendant's amended petition seeking enforcement and modification of the custody provisions of the parties' judgment of divorce.
JANICE A. LAHMAN, ROCHESTER, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
MAUREEN A. PINEAU, ROCHESTER, FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by vacating the award of counsel fees, costs and disbursements, and law guardian's fees and as modified the order is affirmed without costs, and the matter is remitted to Supreme Court, Monroe County, for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum:
We reject the contention of defendant that Supreme Court erred in summarily dismissing her amended petition seeking enforcement and modification of the custody provisions of the parties' judgment of divorce. Defendant "failed to make a sufficient evidentiary showing to warrant a hearing" ( Matter of Lynette L. v. Richard K.A., 210 A.D.2d 1005, 1005; see Alessandro v. Alessandro, 172 A.D.2d 1078). We further reject defendant's contention that the court erred in awarding counsel fees, costs and disbursements to plaintiff, and law guardian's fees ( see 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [a]) without conducting a hearing ( see Matter of Minister, Elders Deacons of Refm. Prot. Dutch Church of City of N.Y. v. 198 Broadway, 76 N.Y.2d 411, 413 n; First Deposit Natl. Bank v. Van Allen, 277 A.D.2d 858, 860-861; Greenwood Trust Co. v. Mason, 277 A.D.2d 740, 741; Matter of Marsh, 207 A.D.2d 749). We agree with defendant, however, that the court erred in awarding counsel fees, costs and disbursements, and law guardian's fees without stating the basis for its determination ( see 22 NYCRR 130-1.2; Briguglio v. Rockefeller Ctr., 204 A.D.2d 503, 504). We therefore modify the order by vacating the award of counsel fees, costs and disbursements, and law guardian's fees, and we remit the matter to Supreme Court, Monroe County, for compliance with 22 NYCRR 130-1.2 ( see Drummond v. Drummond, 291 A.D.2d 368, 370; McCue v. McCue, 225 A.D.2d 975, 979; Briguglio, 204 A.D.2d at 504; Jaswolk Realty Corp. v Jasper, 182 A.D.2d 739, 740).