DANA JUHASZ PLAINTIFF APPELLANT v. STEPHEN JUHASZ DEFENDANT RESPONDENT (2012)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

DANA JUHASZ, PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT, v. STEPHEN JUHASZ, DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT.

CA 11–02012

Decided: December 21, 2012

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, CARNI, AND VALENTINO, JJ.

J. ADAMS & ASSOCIATES, PLLC, WILLIAMSVILLE (JOAN CASILIO ADAMS OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT. KENNEY SHELTON LIPTAK NOWAK LLP, BUFFALO (SHARI JO REICH OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: We conclude that Supreme Court properly denied that part of plaintiff's motion seeking the difference between pendente lite support paid during the pendency of the divorce action and the amounts of maintenance and child support that were ultimately awarded. Plaintiff's contentions concerning retroactive support “were previously raised and decided against [her] or could have been raised on a prior appeal in this matter ․ ‘Therefore, reconsideration of these [contentions] is barred by the doctrine of law of the case’ “ (Matter of Suzuki–Peters v. Peters, 37 AD3d 726, lv. denied 9 NY3d 814, quoting Palumbo v. Palumbo, 10 AD3d 680, 682, lv dismissed 3 NY3d 765).

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network