From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pena v. Pena

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 23, 1998
255 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

November 23, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Lifson, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

We decline to disturb the Supreme Court's award of counsel fees, the evaluation thereof being committed primarily to the sound discretion of the trial court, which is in a "superior position to judge those factors integral to the fixing of counsel fees" ( Levine v. Levine, 179 A.D.2d 625, 626; see also, Matter of Aronesty v. Aronesty, 202 A.D.2d 240). The defendant wife's inability to pay her entire legal bill does not warrant holding the plaintiff husband responsible for payment where the court found that the wife's counsel prolonged this action in bad faith in order to increase his fees ( see, Matter of Aronesty v. Aronesty, supra).

The defendant wife's remaining contentions are without merit.

Copertino, J. P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Pena v. Pena

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 23, 1998
255 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Pena v. Pena

Case Details

Full title:MARCOS PENA, Respondent, v. HERLINDA PENA, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 23, 1998

Citations

255 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
680 N.Y.S.2d 162

Citing Cases

Singer v. Singer

I have considered herein the relative merits of the parties' positions, as well as their respective financial…

Raskin v. Raskin

II. Interim Attorney Fees Defendant has moved for interim counsel fees. A grant of such relief, which is…