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.
Andrew ECKSTEIN, Appellant, v. Barbara ECKSTEIN, Respondent.
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated portions of (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), dated July 1, 1997, which, inter alia, granted the defendant wife's motion for pendente lite child support and interim attorneys' fees, and directed him to pay all mortgage arrears and 60% of “all usual and necessary household bills”, and (2) an order of the same court, dated September 8, 1997, which, inter alia, granted in part the wife's application for an income deduction order, and denied his cross motion to reargue the motion for pendente lite support.
ORDERED that the order dated July 1, 1997, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and it is further,
ORDERED that the appeal from that portion of the order dated September 8, 1997, which denied the cross motion for reargument is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument, and it is further,
ORDERED that the order dated September 8, 1997, is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
To the extent that the issues raised on appeal have not been rendered academic by subsequent proceedings, we decline to disturb the pendente lite award in this case. The proper remedy for perceived inequities in a temporary award is to proceed to a speedy trial, where the financial circumstances of the parties can be fully explored (see, Appold v. Savaglio, 249 A.D.2d 347, 670 N.Y.S.2d 776; Horowitz v. Horowitz, 237 A.D.2d 490, 655 N.Y.S.2d 980; Beige v. Beige, 220 A.D.2d 636, 632 N.Y.S.2d 826).
Under the circumstances of this case, including the husband's admitted income of $135,000, the temporary child support award of $450 per week for both of the parties' children was not improper. We note that while a court may properly rely upon the Child Support Standards Act (see, Domestic Relations Law § 240[1-b] ) for guidance in fixing pendente lite child support, it is not required to apply those guidelines (see, Nordgren v. Nordgren, 237 A.D.2d 498, 655 N.Y.S.2d 585; Stanton v. Stanton, 211 A.D.2d 781, 621 N.Y.S.2d 676).
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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: June 22, 1998
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.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
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)