Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Eun LEE, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Matthew D. SOLIMANO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan B. Lobis, J.), entered June 7, 2005, which, inter alia, dissolving the parties' marriage, equitably distributing the marital property, and awarding plaintiff child support, plus maintenance of $1,000 per month until April 1, 2007, and bringing up for review the order, same court and Justice, entered on or about March 15, 2005, confirming the report of the Special Referee, unanimously affirmed, with costs and disbursements.
Defendant, who asserted in the trial court that there was no need to submit to the court the transcript of the hearing conducted before the Special Referee, has waived the argument he would now make that the court should not have confirmed the Special Referee's report without having before it a complete transcript of the underlying hearing. In any case, the record submitted to the court by plaintiff was sufficiently complete to permit meaningful review of the Special Referee's findings and conclusions (see Matter of Sledge v. Sledge, 228 A.D.2d 310, 644 N.Y.S.2d 198 [1996] ).
The trial court appropriately decided those matters not addressed by the Special Referee pertaining to maintenance, child support and medical insurance (see CPLR 4403; Salomon v. Angsten, 19 A.D.3d 143, 144, 797 N.Y.S.2d 14 [2005] ). We decline to disturb the court's determinations on these issues, which comport with the applicable statutory guidelines and are well supported by the record. The findings of the Special Referee are also supported by the record and, accordingly, were properly confirmed (see Baker v. Kohler, 28 A.D.3d 375, 375-376, 814 N.Y.S.2d 121 [2006] ).
We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 14, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)