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.
Sofia AMSELLEM, respondent, v. Jacques AMSELLEM, appellant.
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals, as limited by his notice of appeal and brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Ross, J.), entered August 14, 2003, as directed him to pay the plaintiff $744.42 in weekly child support, retroactive to the date of service of the pleadings, to obtain health and life insurance for the benefit of the parties' five children, and to pay the sum of $10,000 to the plaintiff pursuant to the parties' prenuptial agreement.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Where the defendant presented insufficient evidence to determine his gross income, the Supreme Court properly awarded child support based on the “needs” and “standard of living” of the children (Domestic Relations Law § 240[1-b][k]; Kay v. Kay, 37 N.Y.2d 632, 636, 376 N.Y.S.2d 443, 339 N.E.2d 143; Acosta v. Acosta, 301 A.D.2d 467, 468, 753 N.Y.S.2d 506; Mayer v. Mayer, 291 A.D.2d 384, 385, 736 N.Y.S.2d 887). The child support award was directed to be retroactive to the date of the initial service of the pleadings based, in part, on the inadequacy of the pendente lite award (see Mayer v. Mayer, supra; Nolfo v. Nolfo, 188 A.D.2d 451, 453, 590 N.Y.S.2d 902). The order of the Supreme Court superseded the pendente lite order of the Family Court (see Family Court Act § 462; Matter of Russo v. Rizzo, 96 Misc.2d 485, 488, 409 N.Y.S.2d 101).
The Supreme Court was authorized by statute to direct that health and life insurance be maintained for the benefit of the children (see Domestic Relations Law § 236[B][8][a]; see also Mayer v. Mayer, supra; Matter of Ciccone v. Ciccone, 287 A.D.2d 563, 731 N.Y.S.2d 489).
The Supreme Court properly directed payment of $10,000 to the plaintiff pursuant to the parties' prenuptial agreement (see Rubin v. Rubin, 262 A.D.2d 390, 391, 690 N.Y.S.2d 742).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: February 22, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)