From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Klein v. Klein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 15, 1986
125 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

December 15, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rigler, J.).


Ordered that the order is modified, in the exercise of discretion, (1) by deleting the provisions thereof which directed the defendant to deliver to the plaintiff bearer bonds in the face amount of $10,000 and authorized her to redeem an additional in the face amount $10,000 for her own use, and directed her to redeem income coupons in the face amount of $6,500 and deliver $3,250 of that sum to the plaintiff; and (2) by adding a provision directing the plaintiff to pay to the defendant $300 per week temporary maintenance and past due bills of $824.46 and $285.50 for fuel oil and medical insurance, respectively. As so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Although a speedy trial is ordinarily the proper remedy for inequities in an order of support pendente lite, relief may be granted on appeal where the interest of justice so dictates (Messina v. Messina, 101 A.D.2d 856). The court's primary concern in determining an application for temporary maintenance is the respective financial conditions of the parties and the movant's needs for such support pending trial (Chachkes v. Chachkes, 107 A.D.2d 786). On the record before us, we conclude that Special Term erred in declining to closely examine the parties' conflicting contentions and simply decreeing a limited division of assets and award of such assets to the plaintiff, which relief was granted without the plaintiff's request. We find on this record that an award of temporary maintenance in the amount of $300 per week to the defendant would be appropriate to meet her needs. While the defendant has failed to substantiate her request for $400 per week for temporary repairs to the marital home, the need for payment of past due bills for fuel and medical insurance has been shown.

The remaining contentions of the parties do not require discussion. Mangano, J.P., Brown, Weinstein and Spatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Klein v. Klein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 15, 1986
125 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Klein v. Klein

Case Details

Full title:ISAAC KLEIN, Respondent, v. SONJA KLEIN, Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 15, 1986

Citations

125 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

Steers v. Steers

The general rule continues to be that the proper remedy for any perceived inequity in an award of support…

Hickok v. Hickok

In the matter before this court the husband contends that the wife is not contributing to the joint marital…