From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Strong v. Eamtrakul

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 9, 1997
243 A.D.2d 296 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

October 9, 1997

Appeal from Family Court, New York County (Bruce Kaplan, J.).


The record supports Family Court's findings that respondent's conduct in preventing petitioner from visiting the parties' child and in bringing stay applications that were completely without merit was undertaken to harass petitioner by forcing him to incur legal fees, and warrants the $7,500 attorney's fee award. Since the motion was brought pursuant to 22 N.Y.CRR part 130, no finding of need was required. Given that counsel billed petitioner only for court appearances and not for office hours spent on the matter, counsel's affirmation was sufficient proof of the reasonableness of her fee. We have considered respondent's other arguments and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Nardelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Strong v. Eamtrakul

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 9, 1997
243 A.D.2d 296 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Strong v. Eamtrakul

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT F. STRONG, JR., Respondent, v. DOUNGRAT EAMTRAKUL, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 9, 1997

Citations

243 A.D.2d 296 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
681 N.Y.S.2d 227