Opinion
March 6, 1984
Appeal from the Erie County Family Court, Sedita, J.
Present — Hancock, Jr., J.P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Moule, JJ.
Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The record supports the imposition of the condition in the order of visitation (see Matter of Darlene T., 28 N.Y.2d 391, 395; Bunim v Bunim, 298 N.Y. 391, 393). Additionally, considering the relative assets of the parties (see Matter of McDonald v McDonald, 94 A.D.2d 856; Drabek v Drabek, 92 A.D.2d 722), the court did not abuse its broad discretion under subdivision (a) of section 237 Dom. Rel. of the Domestic Relations Law in awarding respondent $3,470 for attorney's fees incurred in defending the proceeding brought by petitioner (cf. Drabek v Drabek, supra). The notice of appeal refers only to the order of March 31, 1983 which granted visitation to petitioner and counsel fees to respondent in the Family Court proceeding. Consequently, the order of August 8, 1983 granting counsel fees to respondent on this appeal is not properly before us (CPLR 5526; Boylan v Health Ins. Plan, 74 A.D.2d 835).