From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Edward Lauria v. Teresa Usak-Lauria

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 8, 2009
65 A.D.3d 1017 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 2008-08789.

September 8, 2009.

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Silber, J.), dated July 30, 2008, as granted that branch of the defendant wife's motion which was for an award of an interim counsel fee in the sum of $25,000.

Jacobi, Sieghardt, Bousanti, Piazza Fitzpatrick, P.C., Staten Island, N.Y. (George A. Sieghardt of counsel), for appellant.

Teresa Usak-Lauria, Staten Island, N.Y., respondent pro se.

Before: Skelos, J.P., Florio, Balkin, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting that branch of the wife's motion which was for an award of an interim counsel fee in the sum of $25,000 in light of the disparity in the parties' relative financial positions and the husband's conduct, which resulted in unnecessary motion practice ( see Meltzer v Meltzer, 63 AD3d 702; Davis-Potente v Potente, 60 AD3d 720, 721; Prichep v Prichep, 52 AD3d 61, 66; McGarrity v McGarrity, 49 AD3d 824, 826).


Summaries of

Edward Lauria v. Teresa Usak-Lauria

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 8, 2009
65 A.D.3d 1017 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

Edward Lauria v. Teresa Usak-Lauria

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD LAURIA, Appellant, v. TERESA USAK-LAURIA, Respondent

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

Date published: Sep 8, 2009

Citations

65 A.D.3d 1017 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 6407
884 N.Y.S.2d 866

Citing Cases

Boukas v. Boukas

In the order appealed from the Supreme Court, inter alia, denied that branch of the defendant's motion which…

Sinanis v. Sinanis

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the court properly made the downward modification of his pendente…