Rados v. Rados
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
—Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: The direction that defendant pay 60% of plaintiff’s counsel fees of $75,000 was not an abuse of discretion nor was the award excessive (Bushorr v Bushorr, 129 AD2d 989; Kolmin v Kolmin, 65 AD2d 928). Contrary to defendant’s claims, we have not embraced the rule that a wife must be indigent in order for her to be awarded counsel fees. Rather, her resources or lack thereof are merely one factor to be considered in the totality of the financial circumstances (Kolmin v Kolmin, supra; Alwardt v Alwardt, 41 AD2d 592; see also, Walsh v Walsh, 92…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Schussler v. SchusslerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Walsh v. WalshAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Stern v. SternAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Nemia v. NemiaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Bushorr v. BushorrAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Torgersen v. TorgersenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Denholz v. DenholzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Robinson v. RobinsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Richter v. RichterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Murtari v. MurtariAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.