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.
Mary Ann BERTONE, respondent, v. Jeffrey BERTONE, appellant.
In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated February 6, 1998, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Tolbert, J.), dated January 22, 2004, as denied his motion to set aside portions of the parties' stipulation of settlement dated January 13, 1998, and for a downward modification of his child support obligation, and granted that branch of the plaintiff's cross motion which was for an award of an attorney's fee in the sum of $5,000.
ORDERED that the order is modified, on the law and as a matter of discretion, by deleting the provision thereof granting that branch of the plaintiff's cross motion which was for an award of an attorney's fee in the sum of $5,000, and substituting therefor a provision denying that branch of the cross motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The plaintiff's failure to submit an updated net worth statement on her behalf rendered that branch of her cross motion which was for an award of an attorney's fee defective (see 22 NYCRR 202.16[k][2]; Matter of Fischer-Holland v. Walker, 12 A.D.3d 671, 784 N.Y.S.2d 890). In any event, under the circumstances of this case, the award of an attorney's fee to the plaintiff was an improvident exercise of discretion (see Domestic Relations Law § 237[b] ).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit (see Beard v. Beard, 300 A.D.2d 268, 751 N.Y.S.2d 304; Donohue v. Donohue, 258 A.D.2d 498, 685 N.Y.S.2d 263; 22 NYCRR 202.16[k][2] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
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 07, 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)