From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

R.R. v. P.R

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 8, 2002
298 A.D.2d 169 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

1785

October 8, 2002.

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Marylin Diamond, J.), entered May 30, 2001, which, insofar as appealed from, equitably distributed the marital property and awarded maintenance and child support, with related relief, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

STANLEY CEMBALEST, for plaintiff-appellant.

SUSAN L. BENDER, for defendant-respondent.

Before: Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Buckley, Lerner, JJ.


The trial court properly exercised its discretion in awarding defendant maintenance for three years (see Anonymous v. Anonymous, 289 A.D.2d 106, 107). The award was fair, given the parties' pre-divorce standard of living and reasonable needs (see Kirschenbaum v. Kirschenbaum, 264 A.D.2d 344). Plaintiff's contention that he will be unable to make the required maintenance payments is not persuasive (cf. Kyle v. Kyle, 156 A.D.2d 508, 509).

The trial court also properly exercised its discretion in distributing the marital property. In making the distributive award, the court properly was appropriately cognizant of the value of plaintiff's medical specialty, even though plaintiff was not yet board certified in that specialty at the time of trial (see Procario v. Procario, 164 Misc.2d 79, 81-82). Having discredited defendant's expert on enhanced earnings, the court properly based its findings on other evidence (see Vicinanzo v. Vicinanzo, 193 A.D.2d 962, 967).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Motion to change caption granted.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

R.R. v. P.R

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 8, 2002
298 A.D.2d 169 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

R.R. v. P.R

Case Details

Full title:R.R., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. P.R., DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT

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

Date published: Oct 8, 2002

Citations

298 A.D.2d 169 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
748 N.Y.S.2d 474

Citing Cases

Sonnenfeld v. Sonnenfeld

See, Florescue, " Kudrov, Matisoff: How Marital Agreements are Enforceable," New York Law Journal, March 16,…

Purygin v. Purygina

Thereafter, on April 24, 2008, this action was commenced. Applying the above principles of law to the facts…