From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sweeney v. Sweeney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 24, 1986
118 A.D.2d 774 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

March 24, 1986

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


Judgment reversed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, the first, second and third decretal paragraphs, and so much of the fourth decretal paragraph as directed the defendant to pay her own counsel fees, are deleted, and matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings consistent herewith. Pending a new hearing and determination as to maintenance, the plaintiff shall continue to pay the defendant the sum of $2,500 per month as temporary maintenance.

Professional practices are marital property, and consequently the defendant wife here was entitled to a distributive share of the plaintiff's medical practice (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [5] [e]; Litman v. Litman, 93 A.D.2d 695, affd 61 N.Y.2d 918; Arvantides v. Arvantides, 64 N.Y.2d 1033; cf. O'Brien v. O'Brien, 66 N.Y.2d 576). In view of the fact that the trial court failed to consider the plaintiff's medical practice as marital property, and failed to make a distributive award thereof, the matter must be remitted for a new hearing and determination as to the equitable distribution of property. Further, in light of our determination that the distributive award must be disturbed, we conclude that there should be a new hearing and determination on all of the issues raised on the appeal. Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Sweeney v. Sweeney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 24, 1986
118 A.D.2d 774 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Sweeney v. Sweeney

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD SWEENEY, Respondent, v. KATHLEEN SWEENEY, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 24, 1986

Citations

118 A.D.2d 774 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

Marcus v. Marcus

That valuation should include, inter alia, an analysis of the tangible assets, earnings, goodwill and…

Marcus v. Marcus

The court, however, sustained defense counsel's objections to this questioning and refused to permit further…