Legal Opinion

McCaffrey v. McCaffrey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided January 5, 2010PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The plaintiffs argument that the court failed to adequately advise her of her right to counsel, and that she did not knowingly and intelligently waive her right to counsel in this action, is without merit since she had no right to counsel in the action (see Matter of Smiley, 36 NY2d 433 [1975]; Merkle v Merkle, 186 AD2d 67, 68 [1992]).

The plaintiff alleged that the defendant has two pensions and contends that the trial court erred in awarding her a share of only one of the two pensions. We disagree. “In a nonjury trial, evaluating the credibility of the respective witnesses and determining…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In re SmileyNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. Wasserman v. WassermanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
  3. Merkle v. MerkleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bouffard v. BefeseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  2. Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP v. JMS Architect & Planner, P.C.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
  3. Bouffard v. BefeseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API