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.
Lynne WEINSTEIN, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. David WEINSTEIN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment of divorce, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered November 7, 2002, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, brings up for review orders, same court and Justice, entered on or about April 25, 2002 and September 19, 2002, respectively, denying defendant's motions for reimbursement from plaintiff for the payment of the substituted law guardian's legal fees and costs, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeals from the April 25, 2002 and September 19, 2002 orders, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the ensuing judgment.
The court's initial order appointing a law guardian to represent the parties' children and directing that the parties share the cost of the court-appointed law guardian equally was superseded by an order substituting for the court-appointed law guardian a law guardian who had been retained by the children's paternal grandfather. The substitution was made upon the grandfather's sworn statement that he would pay the substituted law guardian's retainer fee and all of his future fees, which were substantially higher than those of the court-appointed law guardian. Inasmuch as the substituted law guardian was independently retained by the children's paternal grandfather and defendant was estopped from relying on his father's contradictory post-substitution statements alleging that his payments to the substituted law guardian were made only as a loan on his son's behalf, there is insufficient evidence of any loan, much less one that plaintiff was bound to repay (see Gelb v. Brown, 163 A.D.2d 189, 193-194, 558 N.Y.S.2d 934).
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: May 06, 2003
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)