From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schectman v. Schectman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 12, 1967
28 A.D.2d 695 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Opinion

June 12, 1967


Judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated August 22, 1966, modified, on the law and the facts, by (1) reducing the amount awarded for support of plaintiff and the infant son, in the fifth decretal paragraph, to $5,200 per annum, payable in weekly installments of $100 each and (2) amending the seventh decretal paragraph, which requires defendant to pay all the maintenance and carrying charges on plaintiff's residence, so as to limit the requirement to the items of amortization and interest on mortgages, taxes, water charges, fuel and fire and liability insurance. As so modified, judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. Order of said court dated December 19, 1966, modified, on the law and the facts, by (1) reducing the sum of $375, wherever it appears, to $250 and (2) striking out of the fifth decretal paragraph the provision which would apply the direction therein for the issuance of a commitment, without notice, to the failure to pay any weekly support installments commencing on October 3, 1966. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. Defendant's time to purge himself of contempt under said order is extended until 10 days after entry of the order hereon. In the light of all the facts disclosed by this record, we are of the opinion that the sum awarded for the support of plaintiff and her son was excessive to the extent indicated. It is further our opinion that, under the circumstances here, the maintenance and carrying charges on plaintiff's residence should be limited to the items indicated (cf. Bernheim v. Bernheim, 23 A.D.2d 887). The provision in the order of contempt for the issuance of a commitment upon defendant's failure to make weekly support payments subsequent to the five payments with regard to which he has been found in contempt was improper (see Loebel v. Loebel, 237 App. Div. 591). The amount of defendant's default, as found in the order, is reduced in accordance with our modification of the judgment. Beldock, P.J., Rabin, Benjamin, Munder and Nolan, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Schectman v. Schectman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 12, 1967
28 A.D.2d 695 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)
Case details for

Schectman v. Schectman

Case Details

Full title:JEANNE R. SCHECTMAN, Respondent, v. SIMON SCHECTMAN, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 12, 1967

Citations

28 A.D.2d 695 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)