From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fredenburgh v. Fredenburgh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 9, 1992
187 A.D.2d 482 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

November 9, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Walsh, J.).


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

Generally, the remedy for any seeming inequity in the award or denial of temporary maintenance is a speedy trial at which the rights of the parties may be fully determined (see, Weissglass v Weissglass, 52 A.D.2d 923; Thomases v Thomases, 51 A.D.2d 753). Accordingly, the parties should proceed to trial to resolve all issues. In any event, the Supreme Court made a reasonable accommodation between the needs of the plaintiff wife and the defendant husband's financial ability to pay for those needs (see, Crowley v Crowley, 120 A.D.2d 559; Stern v Stern, 106 A.D.2d 631). Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Miller, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Fredenburgh v. Fredenburgh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 9, 1992
187 A.D.2d 482 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Fredenburgh v. Fredenburgh

Case Details

Full title:ELIZABETH FREDENBURGH, Appellant, v. HAROLD FREDENBURGH, Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 9, 1992

Citations

187 A.D.2d 482 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Citing Cases

Forsberg v. Forsberg

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in awarding the wife $200 per week in…