DANA JUHASZ PLAINTIFF APPELLANT v. STEPHEN JUHASZ DEFENDANT RESPONDENT

Reset A A Font size: Print

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