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.
Gary Rubio, respondent, v. Jennifer Rubio, appellant.
Submitted-January 8, 2010
DECISION & ORDER
In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment entered February 14, 2008, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (McNulty, J.), dated February 23, 2009, as denied those branches of her motions which were for an award of an attorney's fee in the total sum of $13,921.75.
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and those branches of the defendant's motions which were for an award of an attorney's fee in the total sum of $13,921.75 are granted.
The parties' settlement agreement expressly provided that, in the event that either party defaulted in complying with its terms, the defaulting party would be required to reimburse the nondefaulting party for an attorney's fee incurred in enforcing the terms of the settlement agreement. The defendant established that the plaintiff defaulted in the performance of certain terms under the settlement agreement. Thus, the defendant was entitled to an award of an attorney's fee in the total sum of $13,921.75 (see Guriel v. Guriel, 55 AD3d 540, 541; Rawlings v. Rawlings, 50 AD3d 998, 999; Leiderman v. Leiderman, 50 AD3d 644, 645; Sayegh v. Sayegh, 49 AD3d 855; Sieratski v. Sieratski, 8 AD3d 552, 553-554). We note that the plaintiff neither challenged nor addressed those branches of the defendant's motions which were for an award of an attorney's fee (see Sieratski v. Sieratski, 8 AD3d at 554-555).
RIVERA, J.P., LEVENTHAL, HALL and ROMAN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: 2009-03106 (Index No. 34567 /07)
Decided: February 09, 2010
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)