From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Faust v. Faust

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 29, 1993
199 A.D.2d 1057 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

December 29, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Wolf, Jr., J.

Present — Pine, J.P., Balio, Lawton, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: The record presented on this appeal is inadequate to support defendant's contention that Supreme Court improperly exercised its discretion in awarding plaintiff $20,000 for counsel fees and $62.02 for disbursements. Defendant does not contest the reasonableness of counsel's hourly fee, and we conclude that the court, in awarding plaintiff only a portion of the total fee requested, considered those factors raised by defendant, specifically, the relative financial circumstances of the parties, marital misconduct and alleged obstructionist and delaying tactics. We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.


Summaries of

Faust v. Faust

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 29, 1993
199 A.D.2d 1057 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Faust v. Faust

Case Details

Full title:CATHERINE B. FAUST, Respondent, v. PETER C. FAUST, Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 29, 1993

Citations

199 A.D.2d 1057 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
608 N.Y.S.2d 910

Citing Cases

Nabi v. Nabi

h the following Memorandum: Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting plaintiff's…

Dougherty v. Dougherty

A party is not required to exhaust her resources in order to receive counsel fees ( see, DeCabrera v…