Legal Opinion
In re Pleto
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 16, 1983PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
— Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Except in the most compelling circumstances, which are not present in this case, the parties to a matrimonial action should not waste their assets and court’s time seeking review of an order of temporary alimony (see Sterlace v Sterlace, 63 AD2d 450, 453). A prompt trial is the most effective means to resolve any claimed inequities in temporary alimony awards (see Chernofsky v Chernofsky, 90 AD2d 765; Hahn v Hahn, 65 AD2d 782; Steinfink v Steinfink, 65 AD2d 621). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Cook, J. — temporary…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sterlace v. SterlaceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Hahn v. HahnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Steinfink v. SteinfinkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Chernofsky v. ChernofskyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
3Cited by5 opinions
- Sayer v. SayerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Armitage v. ArmitageAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Hageman v. HagemanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- McDonald v. McDonaldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Rainville v. RainvilleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985