Opinion
January 22, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan J. Saks, J.).
We agree with Trial Term's determination with respect to the dismissal of the complaint and the award of maintenance to defendant, as well as counsel fees and the costs and disbursements of the action. We cannot, however, discern the justification for denying defendant's application that plaintiff be directed to pay the parties' furniture storage bills. Admittedly, defendant, at plaintiff's request, had moved herself and the parties' children to Hawaii, where plaintiff had accepted a new position. While plaintiff was ostensibly embarking on a new career, the parties' furniture and furnishings from their European home were placed in storage in both their names. Unfortunately, plaintiff's new employment was terminated after only 10 months. Despite plaintiff's assertions to the contrary, the charges for such storage have not been paid since 1983. Defendant, currently enrolled in a four-year university nursing program, is unable to make the payments. Plaintiff is. In such circumstances, we modify the judgment to direct that plaintiff pay the storage charges.
We have considered the other issues raised and find that they are without merit.
Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.