From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lehmann v. Lehmann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 20, 1987
126 A.D.2d 609 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

January 20, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kelly, J.).


Ordered that the order dated December 20, 1984, which granted the plaintiff wife's motion for an award of counsel fees, is reversed, and the order dated December 20, 1984, as amended by the order entered January 31, 1985, is reversed insofar as appealed from without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.

Special Term should have granted the defendant a hearing on the issue of vacatur of the alimony award since the requisite showing was made of a possible change in circumstances concerning the parties' financial situations (see, Levinson v. Levinson, 97 A.D.2d 458; see also, Dash v. Dash, 100 A.D.2d 530).

In addition, the plaintiff failed to comply with 22 N.Y.CRR former 699.11 (now 202.16) with respect to the official form required to be filed on an application for counsel fees (see, Steinman v. Steinman, 87 A.D.2d 649; Lewin v. Lewin, 91 A.D.2d 649). Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Niehoff, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lehmann v. Lehmann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 20, 1987
126 A.D.2d 609 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Lehmann v. Lehmann

Case Details

Full title:HELEN B. LEHMANN, Respondent, v. CHARLES W. LEHMANN, Appellant

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

Date published: Jan 20, 1987

Citations

126 A.D.2d 609 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Lenczycki v. Lenczycki

However, the wife failed to comply with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 202.16 (former 699.11) and did not…

Fraguela v. Fraguela

Therefore, the portion of the February 23, 1990 order dismissing that part of the complaint seeking a divorce…