From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barr v. Barr

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 5, 1994
210 A.D.2d 192 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

December 5, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Stolarik, J.).


Ordered that the cross appeal is dismissed, for failure to perfect the same in accordance with the rules of this Court (see, 22 NYCRR 670.8 [c], [e]); and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

Ordered that the wife is awarded one bill of costs.

Contrary to the husband's contention, the court's maintenance award was proper in view of the statutory factors to be considered in awarding maintenance (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6]; Sperling v Sperling, 165 A.D.2d 338).

Also, the court properly determined that, as part of the equitable distribution of the parties' marital property, upon the sale of the marital premises, the wife will be entitled to a credit of 1/2 of any mortgage and tax payments she makes with respect to the premises (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [5]; see, e.g., Phelan v Phelan, 148 A.D.2d 433; Friedenberg v Friedenberg, 136 A.D.2d 593; cf., Berg v Berg, 186 A.D.2d 236; Ryan v Ryan, 186 A.D.2d 245; Krantz v Krantz, 175 A.D.2d 863).

We have examined the husband's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Lawrence, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Barr v. Barr

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 5, 1994
210 A.D.2d 192 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Barr v. Barr

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL BARR, Appellant-Respondent, v. ELLEN BARR, Respondent-Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 5, 1994

Citations

210 A.D.2d 192 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
620 N.Y.S.2d 262

Citing Cases

Sieger v. Sieger

Defendant does not oppose plaintiff's request that he be awarded title to the property; she claims that she…

Goddard v. Goddard

This is not a proper reason to seek such an award ( see, Sperling v. Sperling, 165 A.D.2d 338). Nor did the…