From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Donohue, v. Donohue

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 27, 1997
239 A.D.2d 543 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

May 27, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Wood, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by adding thereto a provision directing the defendant to pay 73% of the future reasonable health care expenses of the children not covered by insurance; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the plaintiff.

The trial court properly considered all relevant factors before awarding child support and denying maintenance to the plaintiff. Neither the amount nor the duration of the award represented an improvident exercise of discretion ( see, Hartog v. Hartog, 85 N.Y.2d 36; Costantino v. Costantino, 225 A.D.2d 651; Gulotta v. Gulotta, 215 A.D.2d 724; Feldman v. Feldman, 194 A.D.2d 207). Further, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declining to award medical insurance costs to the plaintiff.

The court, however, erred in not apportioning each party's share of the reasonable health care expenses of the children not covered by insurance, pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 240(1-b)(c)(5). The defendant earned 73% of the gross family income, and he must bear this proportion of the unreimbursed health care expenses ( see, Grossman v. Grossman, 224 A.D.2d 489).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.

Miller, J.P., Ritter, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Donohue, v. Donohue

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 27, 1997
239 A.D.2d 543 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Donohue, v. Donohue

Case Details

Full title:WENDY A. DONOHUE, Appellant, v. PAUL B. DONOHUE, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 27, 1997

Citations

239 A.D.2d 543 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
658 N.Y.S.2d 975

Citing Cases

Griggs v. Griggs

The plaintiff correctly notes that the court mistakenly omitted the word "reasonable" to describe the…