From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Aebly v. Lally

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Apr 15, 2015
127 A.D.3d 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

04-15-2015

Richard E. AEBLY, respondent, v. Regan LALLY, appellant.

Regan Lally, Locust Valley, N.Y., appellant pro se. Howard B. Leff, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Alexander S. Leff of counsel), for respondent.


Regan Lally, Locust Valley, N.Y., appellant pro se.

Howard B. Leff, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Alexander S. Leff of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion

Appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Hope Schwartz Zimmerman, J.), dated March 29, 2013, and (2) an order of that court dated April 9, 2013. The order dated March 29, 2013, denied the defendant's motion for an award of counsel fees. The order dated April 9, 2013, denied the defendant's motion, inter alia, for an upward modification of the plaintiff's child support obligation.

ORDERED that the orders are affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The parties to this matrimonial action were divorced by a judgment entered on May 16, 2012, following a trial. The judgment, which deferred the issue of counsel fees for a hearing, was subsequently modified by this Court (see Aebly v. Lally, 112 A.D.3d 561, 977 N.Y.S.2d 50 ). On July 5, 2012, the parties appeared in court and consented to a determination of the motion for an award of counsel fees upon the party's submissions.

Under the circumstances of this case, including the parties' similar financial positions and the distributive award, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for an award of counsel fees (see Filippazzo v. Filippazzo, 121 A.D.3d 835, 994 N.Y.S.2d 671 ; Heymann v. Heymann, 102 A.D.3d 832, 958 N.Y.S.2d 448 ; cf. Guzzo v. Guzzo, 110 A.D.3d 765, 973 N.Y.S.2d 265 ).

The defendant failed to make the requisite showing to warrant an upward modification of the plaintiff's child support obligation as set forth in the parties' judgment of divorce (see Matter of Radday v. McLoughlin, 106 A.D.3d 1015, 965 N.Y.S.2d 355 ; Weill v. Weill, 17 A.D.3d 666, 794 N.Y.S.2d 106 ).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

BALKIN, J.P., HALL, ROMAN and COHEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Aebly v. Lally

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Apr 15, 2015
127 A.D.3d 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
Case details for

Aebly v. Lally

Case Details

Full title:Richard E. AEBLY, respondent, v. Regan LALLY, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 15, 2015

Citations

127 A.D.3d 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
4 N.Y.S.3d 921
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 3110

Citing Cases

Taylor v. Taylor

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, under the circumstances, the Supreme Court providently exercised its…